The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSusitna FERC exhibit E chapter 3 1982- 11< )4-25 .58 r-------------------------:---,ft1=N~,J5a~-----------------------, SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC LICENSE APPLICATION EXHIBIT E ,.... CHAPTER 3 DRAFT NOVEMBER 15,1982 ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &Informatlon Services AnChuf·~.Alaska LO co MenvM Prepared by: iiiJ -'ALASKA POWER AUTHORITy---'------J SUS ITNA HYDROELECTR IC PROJECT EXHIBIT E VOLUME 2 CHAPTER 3 - - - - - -I FISH,WILDLIFE,AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 -INTRODUCTION •••••••••••••••••.•.•••••.•.•.•••••••••••••••••E-3-1 1.1 -Basel ine Description E-3-1 1.2 -Impact Assessments •••••••••.••••••••••••••.••••••••••E-3-1 1.3 -Mitigation Plans -E-3-3 2 -FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE SUSITNA RI VER DRAINAGE •••.••••••••E-3-6 2.1 -Overview of the Resources E-3-6 2.2 -Species Biology and Habitat Utilization in the Susitna River Drainage •••••••••••••••.•••.•••••••••••E-3-12 2.3 -Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Habitat E-3-56 2.4 -Mitigation Issues and Proposed Mitigation Measures E-3-120 2.5 -Aquatic Studies Program E-3-116 3 -BOTANICAL RESOURCES •••••••.••••••.••••••••••..•••••.••••••.E-3-145 3.1 -Introduction ••••••.•••••••.•••••••••••.••••••••.•••••E-3-145 3.2 -Basel ine Deseript ion E-3-151 3.3 -Impacts •••••••••.•.•.•••.•••.•••..•.•.••••••••.••~••••E-3-165 3.4 -Mit i g at ion Plan ••.•••••.••••••••••••••.••.•••••••••••E-3 -186 4 -WILDLIFE •••••••.••••.•••••••••••••.•.•••.•••.••••••••••••••E-3-195 4.1 -Introduet ion •••.•.•.•••.•••••.•.•.•••.••••••••••••.•.E-3-195 4.2 -Basel i ne Deseri pt ion E:"3-197 4.3 -Impacts ••••••.•••••••••".•••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••E-3-279 4.4 -Mit igation Pl an E-3-373 BIBLIOGRAPHIES LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &Information Services Anchvr~c,Alaska LIST OF TABLES Eo 3.1 ..- E.3.2 f""" E.3.3 E.3.4 ""'" Mitigation Options Analysis Structure Recommended by Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Common and Scientific Names of Fish Species Appearing in the Text Commercial Catch of Upper Cook Inlet Salmon in Numbers of Fish by Species,1960~1981 Peterson Popul ation Estimates and Corresponding 95% Confidence Intervals of Chinook,Sockeye,Coho,Chum,and Pink Salmon Migrating to Sunshine,Talkeetna,and Curry Stations,1981 -1982 - I l .- .~ £.3.5 E.3.6 E.3.7 . £.3.8 E.3.9 E.3.1O E.3.11 Eo 3.12 E.3.13 E.3.14 Chinook Salmon Escapement Counts of Susitna River Basin Streams from 1976 to 1982 1982 Chinook Salmon Escapement Surveys of Susitna River Bas in Streams . Apportioned Sonar Counts by Species and Sampling Location, 1981-1982 Coho Salmon Juveniles,Percent Incidence at Habitat Location Sites on the Mainstem Susitna River and Its Tributary Mouths Between Cook Inlet and Devil Canyon,November 1980 to May 1981 Coho Salmon Juveniles,Percent Incidence at Habitat Location Sites on the Mainstem Susitna River and Its Tributary Mouths Between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna,June to September 1981 Eulachon Set Net Catches in Susitna River Estuary Sex Composition and Spawning Condition of Eulachon Sampled at Various Susitna River Locations Arctic Grayling Hook and Line Total Catch by Tributary Between the Mouth and Proposed Impoundment Elevations and Month in the Impoundment Study Area,1981 Arcti~Grayling Population Estimates for Tributaries in the Impoundment Study Area Effects of Surfacing and Earthwork on Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Aquatic Habitat LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) E.3.15 E.3.16 E.3.16a E.3 .17 E.3.18 E.3.19 E.3.20 E.3.21 E.3.24 E.3.25 E.3.26 E.3.27 E.3.28 E.3.29 E.3.30 Increase in Water Surface Elevation During Initial Filling of Watana Reservoir Important Tri butaries Inundated by Watana Reservoi r Major Impact Issues Duri ng Fill i ng of Watana Reservoi r Regarding Sa lmoni ds in the Tal keetna-to-Devil Canyon Reach Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Gold Creek During Initial Filling of Watana Reservoir Compari son of Average Month ly St re amfl ows at Sunshi ne Station During Initi al Fi lling of Watan Reservoir Cornpari son of Average Monthly Streamflows at Sus i tna Stat i on Duririg Initial Filling of Watana Reservoir Stream Habitat Affect by Operation of Watana Reservoir Major Impact Issues During Operation of Watana Reservoir Regarding Salmonids in the Talkeetna-to-Devil Canyon Reach Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Gold Creek Station Under Operation of Watana Dam Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Sunshine Station Under Operation of Watana Dam Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Susitna Station Under Operation of WatanaDam Compari son of Average Monthly St reamfl ows at Go 1d Creek of the Two Operat i ona 1 Watana and Devi 1 Canyon Dams Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Sunshine Station of the Two Operational Watana and Devi 1 Canyon Dams Comparison of Average Monthly Streamflows at Susitna Station of the Two Operational Watana and Devil Canyon Dams Impact Issues and Proposed Mitigation Features for Antici- pated Filling and Operational Impacts to Aquatic Habitats, Susitna Hydroelectric Projects - """'I ~I LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) WI W2 W8 Preliminary List of Plant Species Identified in Summers of 1980 and 1981 in the Upper Susitna River Basin*(U),The Downstream Floodpl ai n (D),and the Intert ie (I) Vascular Plant Sp~cies in the UpperSusitna River Basin and Downstream Areas Which are Outside Their Range,as Reported by Hulten (1968) Endangered and Threatened Plant Species*Sought in the Upper Susitna Basin Surveys with Notes on Their Habitats and Known Local ities Hectares and Percentage of Total Area Covered by Vegetative Community Types in the Watana Reservoir Area Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical-Strata,and Plant Species in Open Conifer Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper SusitnaRiver Basin,Summer 1980 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Open BiackSpruceVegetation/Habitat Type* in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Open White Spruce Vegetation/Habitat Type~ in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Woodland Conifer Vegetation/Habitat Type* in Upper Susitna River Basin~Summer 1980 W9 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Balsam Poplar Forest Vegetation/ Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 WlO Cover Percent ages for Tot 0.1 Vegetati on,Vert i co.1 Strat a,and Plant Species in Closed Birch Deciduous Forest Vegetation/ Habitat Type*Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 W11 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Aspen Deciduous Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 . W12 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Mixed Conifer Deciduous Forest Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin, Summer 1980 - LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd)· W14 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Wet Sedge-Grass Tundra Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 W15 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Mesic Sedge-Grass Tundra Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 W16 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Mat and Cushion Tundra Vegetation/ Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 . W20 W18 W23 WI?Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Tall Alder Vegetation/Habitat Type* in Uppe-r Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Closed Low Shrub Vegetation/Habitat Type* in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 WI9 Cover Percentages for Total Vegetation,Vertical Strata,and Plant Species in Open Low Shrub Vegetation/Habitat Type*in Upper Susitna River Basin,Summer 1980 Hectares and Percentages of Total Area Covered by Vegetative Community Types in the Devil Canyon Reservoir Area W21 Percent Cover in Early Successional Stands on Downstream Floodplain of Susitna River,Summer 1981 W22 Percent Cover in Immature Balsam Poplar Stands on Downstream Floodplain,Summer 1981 Percent Cover in Birch-Spruce Stands on Downstream Flood- plain,Summer 1981 . W24 Hectares and Percent of Total Area Covered by Vegetation/ Habitat Types within the Healy to Fairbanks Transmission Corridor W25 Hectares and Percent of Total Area Covered by Vegetation/ Habitat Types within the Willow to Cook Inlet Transmission Corridor - W26 Hectares and Percent of Total Area Covered by Vegetation/ Habitat Types within the Dam to Intertie Transmission Corridor ",..., Ll~l UF TABLES (Contld) W27 Hectares at Different Vegetatlon Types to be Impacted by the Watana Facility Compared with Total Hectares of that Type in the Entire Upper Susitna River Basin and in the Area within 16 KM of the Susitna River W28 Hectares of Different Vegetat i on Types to be Impacted by the Devil Canyon Facility Compared with Total Hectares of that Type in the Entire Upper Basin and in the Area within 16 KM of the Susitna River -W29 Proximity to the Susitna River of Relocations of 9 Male (m) and 29 Female (f)Moose Radio Collared Along the Susitna River Between Deyi 1 Canyon and the Delta Isl ands,Al aska, 1980-1981 W31 -W30 Summary of Moose Census Data and Subsequent Population Estimates for Count Areas 7 and 14 Derived from Surveys Conducted Along the Susitna River from November 5 through November 8,1980 Density (Moose KM of River)of Moose Observed on 3 Aerial Censuses in 4 Zones of Riparian Habitat Along the Susitna River from Cook Inlet to Devi 1 Canyon,Alaska 1981-1982 W3L Summary of Moose Sex and Age Composition Data Collected Annually in CA6 ln Game Management Unit 13 of Southcentral Alaska W33 Summary of Moose Sex and Age Composition Data Collected Annually in CA7 in Game Management Unit 13 of Southcentral Alaska W34 Summary of Moose Sex and Age Composition Data Collected Annually in CA14 in Game Management Unit 13 of South centra 1 Alaska W35 W36 Summary of Moose Sex and Age Composition Data Obtained During Surveys of Riparian Communities Along the Lower Susitna River Proportion of Radlo Cal Jared Carlbou ~lghtlngs In EaCh Veget at 1 on I ype W37 Ne,l Chl na Can bou Herd Popu I at 1 on t.st lmates W38 Reported Hunter Harvest of the Nelchina Caribou Herd, 1972-1981 LIST OF TABLES (Contld) W39 Compilation of Highest Yearly Counts Completed in Watana Hills Sheep Trend Count Area W40 Number and Age/Sex Classification of Sheep Observed at Jay Creek Mineral Licks from May 6 through June 24,1981 W41 Number of Aerial Brown Bear Observations by Month in Each of 5 Major ~abitat Catagories W42 W43 Comparison of Reported Home Range Sizes of Brown/Grlzzly Bears in North America Densities of Selected North American Brown Bear Populations W44 Average Age and Sex Ratios of Brown Bear Populations in the Upper Susitna and Nelchina River Basins W45 Litter Sizes of Various North American Brown Bear Popula- tions W46 Reproductive Rates of North American Brown Bear Populations W47 W48 Summary of Brown Bear Harvest from Alaska's Game Management Unit 13,1973-1980 Number of Aerial Black Bear Observations by Mouth in Each of 5 Habitat Categories W49 Summary of Reported 13 lack tiear Harvests trom Ar aska I s Game Management Unit 13,1973-1980 W50 Comparisons of Food Remains in Wolf Scats Collected at Den and Rendezvouz Sites in 1980 and 1981 from the Eastern Susitna Basin and Adjacent Areas W51 Estimate of Numbers of Wolves by Individual Pack Inhabiting the Susitna Hydroelectric Study Area in Spring and Fall 1980 and 1981 W52 Number of Sample Units Contalning Indlcated Level of Beaver Actlvity Durlng Summer 1982 Downstream Survey W53 W54 Aerial Counts of Beaver Structures Along 15.2 KM of Lower Deadman Creek Immediately Downstream from Deadman Lake,and a Marshy Secti~n of Upper Deadman Creek from Its Mouth at Deadman Lake 3.2 KM Upstream from the Lake Results of Surveys for Muskrat Pushups Upstream from Gold Creek During Spring 1980 "''''\ LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) W55 Numbers of Furbearer Tracks Seen During Aerial Transects in the Upper SusltnaHasln,Autumn 1980 W56 Number of Tracks of Otter and Mink Observed at North and South Sides of 37Susitna River Check Points,November 10-12,1980 W57 .""""'. W58 W59 W60 W61 W62 W63 Result of Marten Scat Analyses by Season,Based Upon Percent Frequency of Occurence Tracks of Red Foxes I:.ncountered During Fall 1980 Aerial Transect Surveys Location and Status ot Raptor and Raven Nest Sites in the Upper Susitna Basin,Alaska Breeding Chronologies of Eagles,Gyrfalcon,and Common Raven in Interior Alaska Data on Bald Eagle Nests Along the $usitna River Between Devil Canyon and Cook Inlet Summary of Total Numbers and Species Composition of Water- birds Seen.on Lakes Surveyed in Spring,Summer,and Fall in the Upper Susitna Basin Average Denslty of Waterbirds in Lakes in the Upper Susitna Basin in Fall 1980 and Spring and Summer 1981 W64 Seasonal PopuJatlon ~tatlstlcs tor the More Important ot Surveyed Waterbodies of the Upper ~usltna Klver Hasln, 1980-1981 W65 Mean Number of Territories of Each Bird Species on 10-HA Census Plot,Upper Susitna River Basin,Alaska in 1981 and 1982 W66 W67 W68 Mean Avian Habitat Occupancy Levels,Upper Susitna River Basin,Breeding Season,1981 and 1982 Relative Abundance of Birds by Habitat and Vegetation Succession Stage,Lower Susitna River Floodplains,June 10-21,1982.Figures are the number of birds recorded per 100 minutes in each habitat. Comparison of Breeding Bird Densities,1981 and 1982,Upper SusitnaRiver in Alaska LIST OF T~BLES (Cont'd) W69 Number of Small Mammals Captured Per 100 Trap Nights During Four Sarnpl ing Periods Between August 1980 and August 1982, Upper Susitna River Basin W70 Standardized Habitat Niche Breadth Values for Ten Small Mammal Species Sampled by Snap and pitfall Trapping at 43 Sit~s,Upper Susitna River Basin,Fall 1981 W71 Loss of Eight Cover Types Commonly Used by Moose,in Re1 a- tion to Their Availability . W72 Number of Lakes with Muskrat Pushups in Spring 1980 Occur- ring within Borrow Areas and Impoundment W73 General Types of Impacts to Raptors W74 Number of Known Raptor or Raven Nest Sites in the Upper Susitna River Basin,Alaska that would be Inundated by the Watana and Dev i1 Canyon Reservo irs,or that may be Affected by Development of Associated Access Routes and Transmission Routes - W75 Raptor and Raven Nest ing Lac at ions in the Upper Sus i tn a Basin,Alaska that may be Affected by the Susitna Hydroelec- tric Project Development W76 wn Raptor and Raven Nesting Locations in the Upper Susitna Basin,Alaska that may be affected by the Susitna Hydroelec- tric Project Development Linear Distances of C1 iffs in Vicinity of Proposed Impound- ments and Di stances that would be Inundated,Susitna Hydro- electric Project r1I!*l W78 Factors that Affect the Sensitivity of Raptors to Disturbance W78a Proportionate Habitat Loss for Birds W79 Influence of Timing of Disturbance on the Possible Effect on .Raptors W79a W80 Estimated Number of Breeding Pairs of Small and Medium-Si zed Up1 and Birds that will be E1 iminated by the Susitna Hydro- e1ectr ic Proj ect Estimated Percentage Loss of Breeding Pairs of Small and Medium-Sized Upland Birds from Various Aspects of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project W81 The Success of Artificial Nesting Structures Installed on Power Poles and Transmission Towers (Excerpted from 01dendorff Et Al.1981) -LIST OF FIGURES -Susitna Basin with Field Stations -Relatlonship of Field Studles and Monltoring to Impact Assessment and Mitigation Planning -Susitna River Drainage Basin -Option Analysis -Slough Locations and Primary Tributaries of the Susitna River from the-Confluence of the Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers to Devi I Canyon Figure E.3.1 Figure E.3.2 Figure E.3.3 Figure E.3.4 Figure E,3.5 - s arne as above II II II II Figure E.3.8a Timing of Life Stages of Salmon in the Susitna River from Tal keet na to Devi J Canyon Figure E.3.9 -Slough Modification Figure E.3.10 -Mainstream Spawning Bed FigureE.3.11 -Upwell ing Spawning Channel Figure W1 Figure W2 -Vegetation Map of the Upper ~usltna Hlver ~asin - A Schematic Representation of the Dominant Vegetation Associated with Many of the Lakes and Ponds in the Upper Susitna Basin Flgure W3 Figure W4 -Prlmary Successlon on the .susltna Floodplaln -Relative Amounts of Moose Browse Aval table Compared with the Time Since Fire or Other Disturbance in Interi or Alaska Figure W5 Figure W6 Figure W7 Fi gure W8 Patterns of Forest Succession Following Fire in Alaska -Boundari es of Establ i shed Moose Count Areas -Zones Employed by Modafferi to Estimate Moose Densities Within Riparian Communities Along the Susitna River .-Dates of Mortalities of Collared and Uncollared Moose Calves During 1977~1978,and 1980 in the Nelchina and Upper Susitna Basin~Alaska di'-., LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd) Figure W9 Figure WlO Figure Wll Figure W12 Fi gure W13 Figure W14 Figure W15 Figure W16 Figure WI? Figure W18 Figure W19 Flgure W20 Figure W21 Figure W22 Figure W23 -Ulstnbutlon ot Nelchlna Radlo-Collarea CanDou UUrlng the Calving Period,May 15 through June 1U,19BO and 1981 -Location ot ~adio-Collared Caribou in Subherds,May 9, 1980 through September 22,1981 -Caribou-Seasonal Elevation Use by Female and Male Caribou From the Main Nelchina Herd -Location of Dall Sheep Study and Aerial Survey Areas -Suspected Locations and Territorial Boundaries of Wolf Packs Inhabiting the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Area During 1980 and 1981 -General Location and Year of Use of Observed Wolf Den and Kendezvous Sltes Discovered in the Susitna Hydro- electric Project Area from 19?5.through 1981 -Observed Home Ranges of Wolverine in the Upper Susltna Basin Based on Location of Radio-Collared Animals """,,, -Aerial Transects for Furbearers and Checkpoints for Signs of Otter and Mink ~ -Location and Classification of Fox Dens -Location of Lakes and Lake Groups Surveyed for Water- fowl in the Upper Susitna Basin Relative Importance of 20 Waterbodies in the Upper Susitna River Basin Compared to Three Waterbodies in the Upper Tanana River-Scottie Creek Area -Importance Indices of Waterbodies in the Upper Susitna Basln and the Upper Tanance River Basin -Clustering of 42 Small Mammal Trapline Sites into Similar Vegetative Groupings Based on an Analysis of Frequency Counts of 81 Plant Taxe in the Ground Cover -Abundance Patterns of Eight Small Mammal Species Rela- tive to Vegetation Types at 42 Sites in the Upper Susitna River Basin,Alaska,July 29 through August 30, 1981 -Probable Factors Regulating Moose Populations in the Upper Susitna Basin and Actions that might affect these Populations LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd) Figure W24 Figure'W25 Figure W26 Figure W27 Figure W28 Figure W29 Flgure W30 -Probable Factors Regulating Brown Bear Populations in the Upper Susitna Basin and Actions that might affect these Populations -Probable Factors Regulating Black Bear Populations in the Upper Susitna Basin and actions that might affect these Populations -Probable Factors Regulatlng Wolf Populatlons in the Upper Susitna Basin and actions that might affect these Popu 1at ions -Probable Factors Regulating Beaver Populations in the Upper Susitna Basin and actions that might affect these Popul at ions -Probable Factors Kegulating Marten Populations in the Upper Susitna Basin and actions that might affect these Populations -Elevations uf Raptor and Raven Nests in the Vicinity of the Watana Impoundment Area in Relation tu Filling and Operation Water Levels -Changes in Elevations of the Devil Canyon Reservoir During Operation and Elevations of Raptor and Raven Nests in the Proximity of the Impoundment Zone - r~ ..- 3 -REPORT ON FISH,WILDLIFE,AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES 1 -INTRODUCTION This report discusses the fish,vegetation,and wildlife resources of the area that will be affected by the proposed Susitna Hydroelectic Project.Each of the major subsect ions (2 -Fi sh,3 -Botani ca 1 Resources,and 4 -Wildlife)provides a baseline description of species and populations of the project area,an assessment of potential project impacts on this biota,and a mitigation plan that explains how pre- liminary planning,design,and construction have incorporated measures to avoid,minimize,or rectify potentially adverse effects of the project on the bi 01 ogi ca 1 environment.In appropri ate cases,resource r management options to reduce or compensate for adverse impacts that..(''' cannot otherwi se be mitigated are di scussed.~t'" 1.1 -Baseline Descriptions These sections describe the distributions and characteristics of bio- logical populations and communities within the project area.The dis- cussions are based on a thorough review of the scientific literature, and emphasize documented studies conducted in preparation for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)and professi ona 1 consultants.They provide the most current available information through November 1982 on fish,vegetation,and wildlife of the project area. Discussions of animals focus on vertebrate species -resident and anad- romous fi sh,big game,furbearers,and birds.The pl ant descri pt ions deal with species aggregations that occur in recognizable patterns, such as vegetation communities and successional stages. The baseline descriptions emphasize functional relationships among hab- itat components and animal communities.Factors that regulate species distribution and abundance receive particular attention,because knowl- edge of these regulating mechanisms can suggest where populatians are most sensitive to potential disturbance.For example,water tempera- ture and streamflow regimes are discussed as regulators of fish popula- tions,and the role of plant communities in regulating wildlife popula- tions is examined. 1.2 -Impact Assessments It is expected that the distribution and abundance of fish,plant,and wildlife species in and around the area of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project will change as a result of project construct i on and operation. The impact assessments presented in thi s report are based,in part,on the project description presented in Exhibit A,project operations des- cribed in Exhibit B,the proposed construction schedule shown in Exhibit C,and an analysis of similar activities associated with large E-3-1 construction and hydroelectric projects in similar habitats.In addi- tion,the Recreation Plan presented in Exhibit E,Section 7,has been reviewed as a proposed project action to determine its potential impacts on fish,vegetation,and wildlife.The impact assessment links predicted physical changes with habitat utilization to provide a quali- tative statement of impacts likely to result from the Susitna Hydro- electric Project.Changes potenti ally resulti ng from the project are discussed with respect to specific project features and activities, assuming standard engineering design and construction practice without the incorporation of modifications to avoid or minimize the changes. Much of the discussion is based on professional judgment.Data col- lection and analysis programs currently underway will provide the basis for impact quantification. Although some project impacts,if not mitigated,will be adverse,other impacts will be innocuous and some will enhance fish or wildlife pro- ductivity.Therefore,potentially beneficial impacts are given bal- anced treatment with those to be mitigated.Each potential effect, together with the action responsible for it,is called an impact issue. The identification and prioritization of impact issues have followed the procedures established by the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy (Alaska Power Authority 1982;Appendix EA).This policy was prepared by the Power Authority through a Fish- eries Mitigation Core Group,a Wildlife Mitigation Core Group,and a Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Review Group.The core groups,consisting of professional consultants and agency representatives,developed the technical specifics of the mitigation policy.The review group,which consists entirely of state and federal agency representatives,eval- uated draft stages of the mitigation policy and provided comments that were i ncor porated through success i ve revi s ions.The revi ew group included representatives of the following resource agencies: -Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G); -Alaska Department of Natural Resources (AONR); National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); -U.S.Bureau of Land Management (USBLM); -U.S.Environmental Protecti on Agency (USEPA);and -U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In addition to procedures outlined in the Susitna Project mitigation policy,criteria for assessing the relative importance of biological impact issues have been provided by (1)mitigation policies of the A1ask a De partment of Fi sh and Game (ADF &G 1982)and the U.S.Fi sh and Wildl ife Service (Christian 1981);(2)comments and testimony by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (Skoog,1982;Schneider 1979,1982a, b,c),the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR 1982),the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Sowl,1982;USFWS 1979,1980a,b,1982a,b), and the Susitna Hydro Steering Committee (SHSC 1981,1982);and (3) discussions of impact issues in workshops (ESSA/WELUT/LGL 1982)and numerous other technical meetings involving Susitna Project personnel and resource agency representatives. E-3-2 ,."" - ..,., All three mitigation policies imply that project impacts on fish and game species will be of greater concern than changes in the distribu- tion and abundance of non-game wildlife and invertebrate species.The policies and comments also indicate that~for the Susitna Project area~ vegetation is considered more important as a component of wildlife habitat than as a botanical resource in itself.Statewide policies and management approaches of resource agenci es suggest that fi sh and wil d- life species with commercial ~subsistence,and other consumptive uses are more important than species without such value. The mitigation policies all agree that resource vulnerability is an important criterion for impact prioritization.Resources judged most vulnerable to potential project impacts have therefore been given high- est priority in impact assessment and mitigation planning.Similarly, impact issues have been considered with regard to probabil ity of occur- rence.Where there is a high degree of confidence that an impact will actually occur,it has been ranked above impacts predicted with less certainty.Also,the mitigation policies and agency comments indicate that impacts on productivity and animal population size through changes in habitat avai 1abi 1 Hy are of hi gh concern.Behavi oral responses that have the potential for producing population-level effects are also important.Adverse impacts that are longer.;.lasting or irreversi bl e have priority over short-term impacts. 1.3 -Mitigation Plans Mitigation plans have been developed for identified impact issues in accordance with the sequence of steps defi ned by 40 CFR 1508.20 ~pur- suant to the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4321 et seq.). The mitigation planning sequence includes,in priority order of imple- mentation~the follOWing steps: -Avoi di ng the impact through project desi gn and operat i on,or by not taking a certain action~ -l"1i ni Illi zing the impact by reduci ng the degree or magnitude of the action,or by changing its location; -Rectifying the impact by repairing~rehabilitating~or restoring the affected portion of the environment; Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation~moni- toring,and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and -Compensating for the impact by providing replacement or substitute resources that would not otherwise be available. This sequential strategy for mitigation option analysis is shared by all three mitigation policies applied to the project (Alaska Power Authority,1982;ADF&G,1982;USFWS,1982).The relationships of steps within the sequence are shown in Figure E.3.1 and further compared in Table E.3.1. E-3-3 ~-~----------------------- The process by which mitigation will be implemented and continually refined throughout the life of the project is shown schematically in Figure E.3.2.The process involves the following steps: -Impact issue evaluation: •Identification of the nature and extent of impacts: ••Populations Subpopulations ••Habi tat types Geographical areas Ranking importance of resources to be impacted: Ecological value Consumptive value ••Nonconsumptive value ••Confidence of impact prediction -Option Analysis Procedure •Identification of practicable mitigation options: ••Type of mitigation option ••Sequence of implementation •Evaluation of mitigation options: Effectiveness of option ••Conflicts with project objectives ••Residual impacts •Documentation of option analysis: Impact issues ••Mitigation options ••Conflicts (if any)with project objectives -Mitigation plan implementation: •Construction and operating monitoring: Review work accomplished Evaluate degree of impac~ ••Evaluate effectiveness of mitigation ••Identify modifications to the mitigation plan Submit regularly scheduled reports •Mitigation plan modifications: Propose modifications ••Submit modifications for review ••Impl ement and monitor approved modi fi cat ions Data from the baseline,impact,and monitoring studies wi'll be used throughout the 1ife of the project by the mitigation core and review groups to plan and continually refine the mitigation process in a flexible,adaptive fashion. £-3-4 ~ I ~- .... Mitigation measures proposed for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project may be classified within two broad categories: -lV1odifications to engineering,construction or operation,design and planning;and -Management strategies. The first type of mitigation measure is project-specific and emphasizes the avoidance,minimization,rectification or compensation of adverse impacts,as prioritized by the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy established by the Alaska Power Authority (1982)and coordinating agencies (ADF&G,1982;USFWS,1982).As shown in Figure E.3.1,these measures must first be implemented to keep adverse impacts to the mini- mum consistent with project requirements.Theyi nvo 1 ve adjusting or adding project features during design and planning so that mitigation becomes a built-in component of project actions. When impacts cannot be fully avoided or rectified,reduction or compen- sation measures are justified.This type of mitigation can involve management of the resource itself,rather than adjustments to the project,and may require concurrence of resource management boards or agenci es with juri sdi cti on over 1ands or resources withi n and around the project area. Mitigation planning for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project has empha- sized both approaches.The prioritized sequence of options from avoi dance through compensati on has been appl i ed to each impact issue. If full mitigation can be achieved at a high priority option,lower options may not be considered.In the resulting lV1itigation Plan, measures to avoid,minimize,or rectify potential impacts are treated in greatest detail.Specifications for facility siting and design, special mitigation facilities,construction procedures,and scheduling of project actions to mitigate adverse effects on the biota are presented.These are summarized in Appendix EB.Monitoring and maintenance of mitigation features to reduce impacts over time are recognized as an integral part of the mitigation process. Long-term management strategies for project mitigation are discussed as potential options.The Alaska Power Authority is committed to evaluate and recommend such resource management options,and is sponsoring con- tinuing research to define their need and application.Final agreement on measures wi 11 require interagency coordi nati on. E-3-5 .- ""'" 2 -FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE SUSITNA RIVER DRAINAGE 2.1 -Overview of the Resources (a)Description of the Study Area for Fishery Resources The study area for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project fishery. studies includes the Susitna River mainstem,side channels, sloughs,and mouths of major tributaries (Figure E.3.3).From the terminus of Susitna Glacier in the Alaska Mountain Range to its mouth in Cook Inlet,the Susitna River flows approximately 300 miles and drains 19,600 square miles.The mainstem and major tri- butaries of the Susitna River,including the Chulitna,Talkeetna and Yenta Rivers,originate in glaciers and carry a heavy load of glacier flour during the ice-free months.There are many smaller, clear water tributaries that are perennially silt-free,except during flood flows,inclUding P'Qrtage Creek,Indian River,Kroto Creek (Deshka River)and Alexander Creek. Streamflow is characterized by moderate to high flows between May and September and low flows from October to April.High summer discharges result from snowmelt,rainfall and glacial melt.Win- ter flows consist almost entirely of bank storage and groundwater inflow (see Chapter 2).Freeze-up begins in the higher regions in early October,and most of the.r1ver is ice-free by late-May. Three study reaches have been defi ned for basel i ne data gatheri ng and impact analysis based upon stream morphology,flow regime and anticipated impacts.These study reaches are:Cook Inlet (River mile RM 0)to Talkeetna (RM 98);Talkeetna to Devil Canyon RM 152);and the impoundment each from Devil Canyon to a point apprOXimately four miles upstream from the Oshetna River (RM 236.0).. (b)Threatened and Endangered Species No threatened or endangered species of fish have been identified in Al aska.The U.S.Department of Interi or,Fi sh and Wil dl ife Service,does not 1i st any fi sh speci es in Al aska as bei ng threatened or endangered (USFWS 1982).The State of Alaska Endangered Species Act does not list any fish species as endangered. (c)Overview of Important Species Fishery resources in the Susitna River comprise a major portion of the Cook Inlet commercial salmon harvest and provide sport fiShing for Anchorage and the surroundi ng area.Anadromous speci es that form the base of commercial and recreational fisheries include five species of Pacific salmon:chinook,coho,Chum,sockeye and pink.Other anadromous species include eulachon and Bering cisco. E-3-6 Important resident species found in the Susitna River drainage include Arctic grayling,rainbow trout,lake trout,burbot,Dolly Varden and round whitefish.Scientific and common names for all fish species identified from the Susitna drainage are listed in Table E.3.2. The Susitna River is a migrational corridor,spawning area and juvenile rearing area for five species of salmon from its point of discharge into Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon,where salmon appear to be prevented from movi ng upstream by the water velocity at hi gh flow.Preliminary data indicate that the majority of the 1981 Susitna River escapement of sockeye,pink,chum and coho salmon s pawned above the Yentna Ri ver confl uenceand below Curry Stat ion (ADF&G,1981).Preliminary data also show that sloughs between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna provi de spawni ng habitat for pi nk, sockeye and chum salmon.Fi el d data show that juveni 1e chi nook and coho salmon occur throughout,the lower river,concentrating at slough and mainstem habitat during winter and at tributary mouths during summer.The majority of juvenile coho salmon were captured at tributary mouths throughout the year. Hi ghest catches per unit effort for rai nbow trout and Dolly Varden were recorded at mouths of tri butary streams.Data regardi ng geographic and seasonal distribution,relative abundance,length distribution and age distribution for other adult residents are discussed in the following section.Relatively few juvenile resi- dent fish were collected in 1981. (d)Selection of Project Evaluation Species Selection of evaluation species is a necessary step in assessing impacts and in developing mitigation plans.Various species and life stages have different critical life requirements and respond differently to habitat alterations.A change in habitat condi- tions that benefits one species or life'stage'maY adversely affect another and mitigation plans for one speC'iesmay conflict with those proposed for another.Selection of evaluation species can provi de a mechani sm to resol ve potential confl i cts and to focus the resources available for analysis and planning. The evalUation species can be'selectedaHe'r ·"inTfial'baseline stud i es and impact 'assessments have identiffed 'the::domi nant spe- cies and potential impacts on available h'abitiits:'thr'oughout the year~·Mitigations can then be developed that will reduce impacts on population controlling habitat parameters. Fishery resources of the Susitna River and activities associated with the project proposal were revi ewed.Eval uat ion speci es were selected on the basis of the following criteria: -High human use value. -Dominance in the ecosystem. -Sensitivity to project impacts. E-3-7 - ,~ Species with high regional visibility and commercial t sport,sub- sistence,or aesthetic value were given priority.Within this categorYt species sensitive to project effects were highly rated. Since the evaluation species playa dominant role in the eco- system,they may serve as indicator species.By maintaining critical habitats for evaluation species,many of the potential impacts on less sensitive species or species with a lower eval- uation priority will be mitigated. Based on the aquatic studies baseline reports,preliminary impact assessments t and harvest contributions t the five species of Pacific salmon were identified as evaluation species for the Susitna River below Devil Canyon.Arctic grayling was selected as the evaluation species for the impoundment. o salmon juveniles rear in the river for one to two years prior to outmigration with much of the rearing apparently occurring in clearwater areas t such as in slou hs and tributar mouths F&G 1981d,1982a. Since the greatest changes in physical habitats are expected in the reach between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon,fishery resources using that portion of the river were considered to be the most sensiti ve to project effects.Because of differences in their seasonal habitat requirements,not all salmon species would be equally affected by the proposed project.Of the five species, c hum and sockeye sa 1mon appear to be the most vu lnerabl e in th is reach t due to their dependence on slough habitats for spawning t incubation and early rearing (ADF&G 1981a,1981b,1982a).Of the two species,chum salmon appear to be the dominant species (ADF&G 1981b and Trent 1982).Chinook and coho salmon,while having a greater commercial and sport value than chum salmon,are less 1 ikely to be impacted by the project because most of their criti- cal life stages t such as spawning t incubation,rearing and over- wi nteri ng t occur in habitats that are 1ess 1ikely to be altered by the project (ADF&G 1981a t 1982a).While some pink salmon spawn in slough habitats in the reach between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon, the ma"ority of these fish utilize tributary habitats (1981b). In the impoundment zone,Arctic grayling were selected as the eval uat ion speci es because of their abundance in the cl earwater systems ttheir sensitivity to impacts during all seasons and 1 ife stages and their desireability as a sport fish. In summary,the evaluation species and life stages selected for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project are: E-3-8 (i)Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Reach -Chum Salmon •Spawning adults; •Embryos and pre-emer gent fry; •Emergent fry; •Returning adults;and •Outmigrant juveni'les. -Sockeye Salmon Spawning adults; •Embryos and pre-emergent fry; •Emergent fry; •Returning adults;and •Outmigrant juveniles. -Chinook Salmon •Rearing juveniles;and •Returning adults. -Coho Salmon •Rearing juveniles;and •Returning adults. -Pink Salmon •Spawning adults; •Embryos and pre-emergent fry; •Emergent fry; •Returning adults;and •Outmigrant juven"il es. (ii)Impoundment Zone -Arctic Grayling •Spawning adults; •Incubating embryos; •Rearing;and •Overwi nteri ng. (e)Contribution to Commercial.Sport.and Subsistence Fishery (i)Commercial With the except ion of sockeye salmon.the majority of Upper Cook Inlet Salmon production originates in the Susitna drainage (ADF&G 1982b).The Upper Cook Inlet commercial E-3-9 - - ....., ~' ,- I~ - I~ - .- fi shery harvests mi xed stocks.The long term average annual catch of 2.8 million fish is worth approximately 17.9 million dollars (ADF&G 1982b).The Susitna River is considered the most important salmon producing system in upper Cook Inlet~however~the quantitative contribution of the Susitna River to the commercial fishery can only be estimated due to: The high number of intra-drainage spawning and rearing areas; •The lack of data on other known and suspected salmon- pr oduc i ng sy stems in upper Co ok In 1et. •The 1ack of stock separation programs (except for sockeye salmon);and Overlap in migration timing of mixed stocks and species in Cook Inlet harvest areas. Therefore~the following discussion on the contribution of the Susitna River to the upper Cook Inlet fishery is based on the limitations above.Estimates are based upon: •Historica,l sustained harvest in upper Cook Inlet;and •Available escapement data for the Susitna drainage. -Sockeye The commercial sockeye harvest has averaged 1.2 million fish annually in upper Cook Inlet over the last ten years with an ex-vessel val ue of 6.9 mi 11 i on doll ars (Tabl e E.3.3).As a result,the species is considered the most valuable salmon in the commercial fishery.The estimated sockeye escapement in the reach above Talkeetna was 4~800 in 1981 and 3~100 in 1982 (Table E.3.4). -Chum Chum salmon are second to sockeye salmon in economic value for upper Cook Inlet,averaging 2.3 million dollars~ex-vessel.The Upper Cook Inlet chum salmon catch has averaged approximately 700~OOO fish annually over the past ten years (Table E.3.3).The 1981 and 1982 estimates of chum salmQn escapement in the reach above Talkeetna were 20~800 and 49,200 (Table E.3.4.)• E-3-10 -Coho Salmon Upper Cook Inlet coho salmon rank third in commercial value.Si nce 1960 the commercial catch has averaged 240,000 fish (Table E.3.3).The 1981 and 1982 estimates of coho salmon escapement in the reach above Talkeetna were 3,300 and 5,100 (Table E.3.4}c -Pink Salmon The upper Cook In1 et annual average odd-year harvest of pink salmon is about 146,000 with a range of 24,000 to 554,000 while the average even-year harvest is 1,671,000 with a range of 484,000 to 3,232,000 (Table E.3.3). Est i mates of pi nk salmon escapement in the reach above Talkeetna was about 2,300 in 1981 and 73,100 in 1982 (Table E.3.4). -Chi nook Since 1960,the commercial catch of Chinook salmon in Upper Cook Inlet has averaged 12,500 (Table E.3.3).The Upper Cook Inlet harvest for 1981 was 11,500.Since 1964,the opening date of the commercial fishery has been June 25,and the Susitna River chinook salmon run begins in late May and peaks in mid-June.Thus,the majority of chinooks have already passed through the area subject to commercial fishing.Estimates of chinook salmon es- capement in the reach above Talkeetna were 10,200 in 1982 (Table E.3.4). (ii)Sport Fishing Recent increases in population and tourism in Alaska have resuHed in a growing demand for recreational fishing. Recreational fishing is now considered a significant factor in total fisheries management,especially in Cook Inlet where sport-commercial-subsistence user conflicts have developed (Mi 11 s 1980).The Susitna Ri ver and its major salmon and resident fish-producing tributary streams pro- videa multi-species sport fishery easily accessible from Anchorage and other Cook Inlet communities.In 1980,the Susitna River and its primary tributaries accounted for over one hundred thousand man days of sport fishing effort and about 9 percent of the total ang1 er days in A1 aska (Mi 11 s 1980). Based upon 1980 mailing surveys to a sample of licenses (Mills 1980),the following sport fish harvest was reported for important anadromous and resident fish in the Susitna River and its primary tributaries: E-3-11 ,~ ~' 1I!fPF.. Salmon Pin k •••••.••••.•.••••-54,244 Coho 13,657 Chinook..............6,493 Chum-••..•.•..••.•.•.•4,,673 Sockeye 925 Other Anadromous and Resident Arcti~Graylihg ...••. Ra i nbow Trout ..•..... Dolly Varden . Bu rbot . Lake Trout •.......... 13,921 12,965 3,024 591 267 (iii) The figures represent the sport fishing harvest in an area that is larger than that which could be affected by the proposed project. The estimated catch of Arctic grayl ing represents about 20 percent of the estimated harvest in southcentral Al aska in 1980 and the est imated catch of rai nbow trout represents about 17 percent of the entire state harvest in 1980.The Susitna harvest of pink salmon represents about 33 percent of the total estimated harvest for southcentral Al aska, whereas the harvest of coho represents about 11 percent of the estimated harvest for southcentral Al aska and the harvest of chinook represents about 27 percent.of the estimated harvest for southcentral Alaska. Subsistence Harvest Although salmon form an important resource for many Susitna Basin residents,subsistence fishing within the Susitna Basin is not a recognized harvest by the state.The Tyonek Village subsistence salmon fishery,approximately 30 mi southeast of the mouth of the Susitna River,is supported at least in part by Susitna River stocks. """'I - 2.2 -Species Biology and Habitat Utilization in the Susitna River Drainage (a)Species Biology (i)Salmon -Chinook In the Susitna River below Talkeetna the adult chinook salmon migration begins in late May and ends in early to mid-July.Historically,by 1 July,90 percent or more of the escapement have migrated past the Susitna Station (ADF&G 1972).Sonar counters and fishwheels installed to E-3-12 monitor escapements for pink,chum,sockeye and coho salmon provided some incidental information regarding the timing of chi nook runs.Fi shwheel catches i ndi cate that the mi grat i on ended by July 9 at the Sus;tna and Yentna sta- tions.Initial sonar counts made at Sunshine Station also suggested that a significant segment of the escapement had migrated past this location prior to the June 23 sonar counter installation.Similarly,a sizable portion of escapement had already passed the Talkeetna site before June 23,when the sonar counters became operational.Fish- wheel catches and sonar counter data indicated that the peak of upstream migration at Sunshine Station occurred on June 23 and that migration ceased about July 10.At Curry Station,the fish wheels were in place early enough to clearly define the beginning of migration on June 16,the peak of migration on June 23 and the end of migration on July 4.. At four of five mainstem sampling stations in 1981,an un- determi ned portion of the early escapement was not re- corded,rendering it impossible to estimate total escape- ment through either sonar counts or tagging studies.How- ever,stream escapement surveys (Table E.3.5)made from helicopters,fixed-wing aircraft and from the ground (ADF&G 1978,1981b)indicate that total escapement within the drainage is in the range of 100,000 with a minimum annual escapement of 60,000 needed to maintain stocks at historic levels.Without repeated spawning ground counts and know- ledge of average stream life expectancy of chinook salmon ; n each stream surveyed,the escapement counts cannot be cons i dered an abso 1ute measure of total escapement; however,they can be considered an index of abundance. Radio telemetry studies during June,July and August of 1981 (ADF&G 1981b)indicated that the confluence of the Talkeetna,Chulitna and Susitna Rivers is a probable mill- ing area for migrating adult chinook salmon.The four fish tagged at the Talkeetna site moved downstream and remai ned either at the confl uence or downstream from this area for several days or weeks before movi ng back upstream.This downstream movement was seen in two of the twelve fish that were radio tagged at the Curry Site.El even of the thir- teen tagged fish that moved upstream after being tagged at Talkeetna or Curry Stations entered a single tributary and remained there.Two of the remaining tC\gged fish entered a different tributary,one moved downstream and hel d near Chase Creek,and two were lost because of technical difficulties with the transmitters. Four-ye'arol d i ndi vidq~l$"were domfn~n(~..at Sunshine and Curry Stations while at Taikeetna,.six:,"and.four-year olds were equally abundant.There was a hi gher'percentage of younger fi sh,rnai nly three-year 01 ds,at Sunshi ne Stati on E-3-13 ~, .- .- ..... than at either the Talkeetna or Curry Stations.Seven-year old fish were relatively scarce at Sunshine and Talkeetna and none were identified from the Curry Station sample. Surveys of chinook salmon spawning areas were performed by helicopter,single-engine fixed-wing aircraft and by foot during the 1981 and 1982 investigations.Chinook appear to spawn in the tri butari es rather than the mai nstem of the Susitna River.Some of the more important spawning tri butari es i ncl ude Al exander Creek,Kroto Creek,(Oeshka River),Willow Creek,Clear Creek (in the Talkeetna Orai nage),Chul itna Ri ver,Peters Creek,Lake Creek, Tal achul itna Ri ver,Prairi e Creek,Montana Creek,Indi an River and Portage Creek (Table E.3.5 and Table E.3.6). In the Susitna River system chinook spawn in July and early August (ADF&G 1981b).In Al aska each femal e deposits from 4,200 to 13,000 eggs,which incubate in the gravel through winter and hatch the following spring (Morrow 1980).The alevins genera'lly remain in the redd for two to three weeks until the yolk sac is absorbed and then emerge from the gravel and become free-swimming,feeding fry (Morrow 1980). The chi nook fry school after emergi ng from the gravel but become territorial as they grow.Aquatic insect larvae, including chironomids and caddis flies,as well as small crustaceans,are the major food sources for juvenile chinook salmon (AOF&G 1978).Analysis of adult chinook salmon scales show that most Susitna River salmon appear to remain in freshwater for one year before smolting (ADF&G 1981b)• The geographical and seasonal distribution,relative abun- dance,age composition and smolt migration timing of juve- nil e chi nook salmon reared in the Susitna drai nage are summarized below based upon studies by ADF&G (1981d), Delaney et.ale (1981),and ADF&G (1978). Juvenile chinook salmon were captured throughout the study area from Al exander Creek (RM 10.1)upstream to Portage Creek (RM 148.8).Collection techniques and data summaries for juvenile collections are detailed in AOF&G (1981d). Populations varied in abundance and distribution by river habitat type and seasonal peri ad.Ouri ng wi nter,most juveniles were captured in mainstem and slough sites.All juvenile chinook salmon captured at the mainstem and slough si sociated str ~ emfgrat i on a late fall is apparently the result in tributaries (ADF&G 1981d). E-3-14 During summer,juvenile chinook were also captured through- out the study area below Devil Canyon from Al exander Creek to Portage Creek.A total of 6,579 juvenile chinook were captured duri ng the summer surveys between Cook Inl et and Devil Canyon.The reach between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon accounted for 34 percent of the total captures and the remai nder were captured between Cook In 1et and Talkeetna (ADF&G 1981d).Tributary mouths appear to provide impor- tant rearing habitat during summer months.Clearwater sloughs may also supply summer rearing habitat and may be important year-round rearing habitat. Two age groups of juvenil e chi nook salmon.represent i ng brood years 1979 (1+)and 1980 (0+).were identified from scale analysis and length distribution.Age 1+were ob- served between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon at 45 percent of sites surveyed during the first two weeks of June.Cap- tures decreased and terminated in July.Age 1+were not captured after August in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach. It was concl uded that the decreas i ng numbers of age 1+ chinook salmon was a result of smolt out-migration (ADF&G 1981d).The peak smolt movement apparently occurred prior to early June sampling. Catches of age 0+in mainstem and slough habitats increased from 1ate June to a hi gh in early September for the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.This was interpreted as an indication that juvenile distribution expanded from tributary streams and stream mouth sites into mainstem and slough sites as summer progressed (ADF&G 1981d). I nterpretat i on of present and past surveys of the Susitna River and its tributaries have resulted in the following conclusions relating to abundance.distribution and out- migration (ADF&G 1981d). •Juvenile chinook salmon populations are not static but vary in abundance and distribution by river habitat and season. •Redistribution of juvenile chinook from areas of emer- gence (tri butari es)to more favorabl e habitat at the mouths of tributaries and sloughs begins as the fish reach a mobile state. •Tributary mouths appear to provide important milling and rearing areas for juveniles during summer months. •During late fall.lowered flow conditions develop in the tri butary systems and juvenil es move into the mai nstem and slough habitats to overwinter. E-3-15 - - _. - - - - The majority of juvenil e chi nook spend one wi nter in freshwater before mi grati ng to the sea.Out-mi grat i on in the reach from Talkeetna to Devil Canyon peaks pri or to early June and terminates by the end of July throughout the drainage. Sockeye The escapement,migrational timing,and population esti- mates of adult sockeye moving up the Susitna River to. spawning grounds were measured in 1981 and 1982 by side- scan sonar,fishwheel catches,and tag/recapture studies. Five escapement monitoring stations were establ ished in early June 1981 at locations identified in FigureE.3.4. Operating dates,equipment used and methodology are des- cribed in detail in ADF&G 1981b.Sonar counts and tag/- recapture population estimates (Tables E.3.4 and E.3.7)for sockeye salmon are discussed below. At Susitna Station,the sockeye salmon migration extended from June 29 to August 24,with the mi dpoi nt of the run occurring on July 17.A total of 340,000 individuals were counted by side-scan sonar counters.From July 11 to July 23,75 percent of the escapement passed Susitna Stati on. Fishwheel catch per hour indicated that the peak migration occurred between July 10 and 19. A total of 139,000 sockeye were counted by sonar at the Yentna Station.The migration began on July 1,the mid- point occurred on July 16 and the run ended by August 3. Between July 12 and 23,75 percent of the total fi sh escapement had passed Yentna Station.Fi shwheel catches indicated that the migration peak was between July 13 and 15. Sonar counts at Sunshine Station totaled 89,900.The mi- gration began on approximately July 16,reached a midpoint on July 23,and ended on August 20.Between July 19 and 28,75 percent of the sockeye migrated past this location. Based upon fishwheel catch records,the peak of the migra- tion occurred between July 18 and 23. At Talkeetna Station,3,500 sockeye were counted.The migration commenced on July 23 and was completed by August 8.The midpoint occurred on July 31.A majority of the total count was made between July 23 and August 6.It appeared from fishwheel catch data that the migration peak occurred between July 27 and August 1. I~ The Curry Station fi shwheel caught 470 sockeye. indicate that the migration commenced on July 18, midpoint on August 5,and was not over until 29. E-3-16 Results reached a September From the sonar data,the migration chronology of sockeye salmon indicates that those fish passing Susitna Station enroute to the Yentna River made the 6.2 mile trip in one day or less.Individuals migrating past Susitna Station toward Sunshine Station covered this distance in an average of 8 days (6.8 miles)and reached Talkeetna Station in an average time of 13 days (4.6 miles).Tag/recapture data indicated that the minimum travel time between Sunshine and Talkeetna Stations and Curry Station was approximately five days or a travel speed of approximately 3.5 miles/day. Popul at i on estimates were cal cul ated based upon taggi ng operations.Sockeye estimates indicated that apprOXimately 133,000 sockeye migrated past Sunshine,4,800 passed Talkeetna,and 2,800 passed Curry Station in 1981,in 1982 152,000,3,100,and 1,300 passed the same stations respec- tively (Table E.3.4).The 95 percent confidence limits on the 1981 estimates and components used to calculate them are discussed in ADF&G (1981b).There are discrepancies between population estimates from sonar counts and esti- mates from tag and recapture studies (Tables E.3.4 and E.3.7).These discrepancies reflect limitations inherent in both techniques (ADF&G 1981b),which nonetheless repre- sent the state-of-the-art for est imati n9 popul at ion sizes in glacial river systems. Sockeye salmon age composition analyses indicate that a majority of the fish sampled at each station were age 52' (i.e.five years old with two years in fresh water).The second most abundant age group was 42 followed by age 62.Five-year old fish comprised apprOXimately 86 per- cent of the return at Susitna Station and Yentna Station, 73 percent at Sunshine and Talkeetna Stat i on,and 70 per- cent at Curry Station.Further age composition data are given by ADF&G (1981a). Surveys of sockeye spawni ng areas were conducted in the mainstem Susitna River between Cook Inlet and Devil Canyon from late July through September using drift gill nets, electroshocking equipment and egg deposition pumps.Susit- na River tributary streams and sloughs between the Talkeet- na River confluence and Devil Canyon were surveyed on foot for spawning salmon from late July through September.De- tailed methodology is given in ADF&G (1981b).No mainstem spawning was observed for sockeye salmon;sockeye spawning areas were documented in several sloughs and one tributary. In the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach,adult sockeye were observed in Sloughs 38,3A,6A,8A,9A,98,11,17,19,10 20 and 21 and in lower McKenzie Creek (Figures E.3.5 - E.3.8).Peak spawning occurred during the last week of August and the first three weeks of September.Of the E-3-17 - F- , ""'" locations listed,sockeye were most numerous in Sloughs 8A, 9Band 11,where peak spawning ground counts were 177,81 and 893,respectively. A1though a 1imited number of juveni 1e sockeye salmon were captured duri ng ADF&G 1980-81 i nvesti gat ions,the tech- niques utilized did not result in the data necessary to determi ne early 1 i fe hi stori es and freshwater reari ng of the.speci es in the Susitna Ri ver (AOF&G 1981d).Sockeye salmon are normally found in river system with lakes which provide nursey areas for juveniles.The Susitna River does not contai n 1ake habitat usua lly associ ated wi th sockeye salmon.Results of smolttrapping during Spring 1982 will lead to an increased understanding of the life history phases of Susitna River sockeye. Based upon information from other sockeye producing spawn- ing areas,mature females typically produce from 2,500 to 5,300 eggs (Morrow 1980).Hatchi ng normally occurs duri ng the peri od January-March.Fry remai n in the 9ravel for several weeks and then emerge during the period April through June.Fry move into 1akes or other reari ng areas after emergi ng from the gravel.After spendi ng 1 to 3 years in fresh water,the fish migrate in schools to feeding grounds in the Pacific Ocean (Morrow 1980). Coho The escapement,migrational timing and population estimates of adult coho salmon migrating up the Susitna River to spawning grounds were determined (ADF&G 1981b).The results of apportioned side-scan sonar counts and tag/- recapture estimates are shown in Tables E.3.4 and E.3.7 and discussed below. The peak of the coho salmon migration into the Susitna River drainage occurs in mid-July and early August,but can extend from late ·June into September.Side-scan sonar counts and migration periods for each sampling station are summarized below • • A total of 33,500 coho salmon were enumerated by the sonar counters at SusitnaSati on.The mi grati on began, reached a midpoint and ended on July 20,July 28 and August 25,respectively.Approximately 75 percent of the fish passed this station between July 23 and August 16. Fi shwheel catches indicated a mi grat i on peak occurri ng between July 25 and July 30 • •At the Yentna Station,17,000 coho were enumerated by the sonar counters.The migration began on July 22,reached a midpoint on July 31 and ended on August 20.The major E-3-18 portion of the run passed this location between July 23 and August 16.The peak of migration occurred between July 23 and August 6. •The count at Sunshine Station was 22,800 coho salmon. The beginning of the migrational period was July 29,the midpoi nt was reached on August 18 and the run ended on September 5.Between August 4 and August 24,75 percent of the migration run occurred.The peak migration period was between August 18 and August 25. •At Ta lkeenta,3,500 coho were enumerated by sonar coun- ters.The beginning of the migration was July 30,August 24 was the mi dpoi nt,and September 11 was the termi na- t i on.The majority of coho were counted between August 11 and September 1.The migrational peak period occurred between August 19 and August 30. •Curry'Stat ion fi shwheel catches i ndi cated that the coho migration be~an at this location on August 5,was at its mi dpoi nt on August 22 and ended on September 4. The average travel time for coho salmon migrating between Susitna Station and Yentna Station was two days,a travel rate of approximately 3.1 miles/day.An average of four- teen days was required to reach Sunshine from Susitna Station.Total travel time from Susitna Station to Tal- keetna Station \lIas approximately 24 days.These travel times can be equated to a migration rate of 3.9 miles/day to Sunshine Station from Susitna Station and 3.1 miles/day between Susitna Station and Talkeetna Station.Tag/- recapture of marked coho i ndi cated that between Ta lkeetna and Curry Stations,the migration took between two and fifteen days with an average travel time of 4.5 days.This was a migrational rate of approximately 3.7 miles/day. Population estimates derived from tagging and recapture operations indicated that approximately 19,000 coho salmon migrated past Sunshine Station,3,300 past Talkeetna Station and 1,100 past Curry Station in 1981,while 45,800, 5,100 and 2,500 passed the same stations in 1982 (Table E.3.4).The majority of individuals sampled for age analyses in 1981 were 42'from the 1977 brood year, followed by age 32'for the 1978 brood year.Less than 10 percent of the 1981 coho escapement cons i sted of other age groups. Surveys of spawni ng areas were conducted in the mai nstem, sloughs,and tributaries of the Susitna River (ADF&G 1981b).Of twelve mainstem spawning sites identified, coho salmon were the only species observed at one site and coho and chum salmon shared spawning sites in two mainstem E-3-19 - .-. .... - - - areas.Coho salmon were not observed spawning in any of the sloughs surveyed but were observed in Whiskers Creek, Chase Creek,Lane Creek,Gash Creek,Lower McKenzi e Creek, Fourth of July Creek,Indian River and Portage Creek.The highest densities,based upon peak index counts,were in Whiskers Creek,Chase Creek,Gash Creek and Indian River, where 70,80,141 and 85 coho,respectively were recorded spawning in a single survey.The survey data indicate that the spawni ng peak probably occurred in the second and thi rd week of September. Based upon general information on coho salmon life history in Al aska (Hartman 1971),each female deposits an average of 3,500 eggs,which incubate in the gravel through winter. Upon emergence in March and Apr i 1,fry generally occupy areas with adequate cover,low water velocities and mode- rate water temperature for optimum growth (Gray et.a 1. 1978;Delaney and Wadman 1979;Watsjold and Engel 1978). Drifting aquatic insect larvae are the major diet items of juvenile coho salmon in spring;adult stages of these insects are major feed items duri ng summer and fall (ADF&G 1978).Juvenile pink,chum and sockeye salmon can also be an important supplemental food source to age 1 or older coho salmon (Roos 1960;Scott and Crossman 1973). The geographical and seasonal distribution,relative abun- dance,age composition and smolt migration timing of coho salmon reared in the Susitna drainage is summarized below based on studies by ADF&G (1981d)• Juvenile coho salmon were captured throughout the study area between Al exander Creek (RM.10.1)and 510ugh 21 (RM 141.8)at 55 out of 99 sample sites from November 1980 to October 1981.Collection techniques and data summaries for juvenile collections are detailed in ADF&G'(1981d). During the winter and spring (November-May),juvenile coho salmon frequently occurred (measured by percent incidence) at tributary mouth sites between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna, and at a mainstem and slough sites between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon (Table E.3.8).A total of 337 juvenile coho salmon were collected from Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon.The maximum catch rate for juvenile coho salmon was 8.0 fish per trap at Slough 6A in March.Length frequency and scale analysis indicated that two age groups,brood years 1978 (2+)and 1979 (1+)were captured between Cook Inlet and Devil Canyon. Duri ng June-September 1981,juvenil e .coho sal man occurred most frequently at tributary mouthsi n the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach (Table E.3.9).A total of 3,605 juvenile coho salmon (combined age groups 0+and 1+)were captured E-3-20 between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna.During the same summer sal11p1 ing period (June through September 1981),a total of 1,216 juvenile coho salmon were captured between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon.(Table E.3.8).Occurrence of age 0+ (1980 brood year)was consistently higher at tributary mouth locations than at mainstem or slough locations throughout the summer.The frequency of occurrence in tributary mouths increased during the summer.This indi- cates that age 0 coho were moving out of the tributaries duri ng 1ate summer.Maximum catch rate for juvenil e coho salmon recorded during summer was 41.0 fish per trap at Caswell Creek (RM 63.0)in late August. Three age groups of juvenile coho salmon were collected at various habitat locations in the Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon reaches of the lower Sus itna Ri ver from November 1980 to October 1981.Th ese fi sh represented brood years 1978 (2+),1979 (1+)and 1980 (0+).Distribution of 0+fish progressively increased from June when they were first captured through September.The incidence of 1+coho sal- mon in catches of all habitat locations between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon also increased from late July to Sep- tember.Between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna,a similar pattern was observed.Catch rates then decreased in 1ate September for 0+and 1+throughout the lower Susitna(Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon)(ADF&G 1981d). Age 2+individuals were captured during the winter sampling period,November 1980 to May 1981,but were not captured after May in the Ta 1keetna to Devi 1 Canyon reach and after mid-June in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach.This find- i ng i nd i cates that the pr edomi nate age group for sma lts in the Susitna Ri ver is age 2+and that in the Ta 1keetna to Devil Canyon reach the majority of smolting took p1 ace prior to 1 June 1981 and between Cook Inlet to Talkeetna by June 15. -Chum The escapement,migrational timing,and population esti- mates of adult chum salmon migrating up the Susitna River to spawni ng grounds were measured by si de-scan sonar and fishwhee1 catches in combination with tag-recapture esti- mates.Apportioned sonar counts and fishwhee1 catches show that the chum salmon migration began during the second week in July and ended during early September.The peak migra- tion period in the Susitna River upstream of Talkeetna was from late July until late August.Side-scan sonar counts and popu1 ati on estimates based on tag/recapture data are summarized in Tables E.3.4 and Eo3.7.Migration periods for each sampling station are summarized below. E-3-21 ~I - ,~ - • A total of 46,500 chums were counted at Susitna Station by the sonar counters.The mi grat i on began at Susitna Station on July 10,reached a midpoint on July 27 and ended on August 25.Between July 15 and August 6,75 percent of the escapement occurred.Fishwheel catches indicated that the migration peak occurred between August August 3 and 7. •The Yentna Station enumerated 19,800 individuals.The migration run began at Yentna Station on July 13,reached its midpoint on July 29 and ended on August 24.A major- ity of the fi sh were counted between 18 July and 15 August.Fishwheels operated at Yentna Station indicated that the migration run reached its peak between July 20 and 23. •Counts at the Sunshine Station totaled 59,600 chums.The migration at this location commenced on 22 July,reached a midpoint on August 6 and ended on approximately Septem- ber 6.Seventy-fi ve percent of the fi sh were counted between July 27 and August 24.The peak of chum mi gra- tion at Sunshine Station,as indicated by fishwheel catches,occurred between August 17 and 19. • A total of 10,000 chum salmon were counted at Talkeetna Stati on.The begi nni ng of the migrati on was approxi- mately July 28,the midpoint was reached on August 8 and the migration ended on August 29. •Fishwheel catches at Curry Station indicated that the chum migration began around July 29.The midpoint of the run was August and the mi grat i on termi nated on Septem- ber 2. Chum salmon averaged four days travel time between Susitna Station and Yentna Station,which corresponds to a travel rate of 1.6 miles/day.Average travel time between Susitna Station and Sunshine Station was 10 days,which is a travel rate of 5.6 miles/day.The migration period between Susitna Station and Talkeetna Station averaged 14 days or approximately 5.6 miles/day.Chum salmon tagged·at Sunshine Station took between two and nine days to reach Talkeetna Station. Between Talkeetna Station and Curry Station the number of travel days ranged from 1 t024 days with an average travel time of approximately 4.5 days and a travel rate of approx- imately 3.7 miles/day. Popul ation estimates derived from tag and recapture data indicated that approximately 263,000 salmon migrated passed Sunshine,20,400 past Talkeetna Station and 13,000 passed Curry Station in 1981,while 431,000,49,200 and 29,500 E-3-22 passed the same stations in 1982.At each sampling site, age 4 chum salmon from the 1977 brood year dominated the catch in 1981,compri si ng,on the average,86 percent of the sample.Second in abundance were age 5 fish followed by age 3 individuals. Spawning surveys conducted in the mainstem of the Susitna River from Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon during 1981 revealed that 10 of 12 mainstem spawning locations identified were occupied by chum salmon.Spawning surveys conducted in sloughs and tributaries between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon also documented the presence of chum salmon in Sloughs 1, 2,6A,8 8B,Moose,AI,A,8A,9,9A,9B,11,13,15,17, 19,20,21 and 21A (Figures E.3.5 and E.3.8).They were al so found withi n the survey reaches of Whi skers Creek, Chase Creek,Lane Creek,Lower McKenzie Creek,Skull Creek, Sherman Creek,Fourth of July Creek and Indian River.The peak spawning activity in the sloughs occurred during the last two weeks of August and the first two weeks of September.The hi ghest counts were recorded in Sloughs 8, 8A,9,11 and 21,where 302,620,260,411 and 274 chums, respecti vely,were found spawni ng.Based on the 1imited stream survey data,the peak spawning period was approximately one week earlier in streams than observed in slough spawning areas.The highest peak count in an index area was registered in Fourth of July Creek,where 90 chums were counted on August 7. Based on general information from other chum sa1mon- producing areas in Alaska,females produce an average of 3,000 eggs (Harman 1971).Limited sampling of pre-emergent chum fry conducted April 11 in the area of Gold Creek revealed that yolk sac absorption was 95-100 percent complete.Following emergence,usually during April or May,chum fry remain in the river for only a short period before out-migrating.Limited beach seine sampling resulted in the capture of 1,650 chum fry on June 19 in Slough 11.Al though juveni 1e chum were captured duri ng ADF&G 1981 investigations,the techniques utilized did not result in the data necessary to determine early life hi stori es in the Susitna Ri ver (ADF&G 1981d).Because of this,the 1982 field program utilized smolt traps to obtain more accurate information on juvenile chum salmon.Speci- fic timing of out-migration for the Susitna River system is being addressed in the analysis of 1982 data. Pi nk Pink salmon have a 2-year life cycle that results in two genetically distinct stocks occurring in each stream.The stocks are called 1I 0 dd-1i or lIeven-yearli on the basis of the year in whi ch adul ts spawn.In the Susitna drai nage,the E-3-23 ....., - - - - ..... - - - .... - even year runs are numer i ca 11y domi nant.The escapement migrational timing and population estimates of pink salmon mi grat i ng up the Sus itna Ri ver to spawni ng grounds as measured by side-scan sonar and tag-recapture are shown in Tables E.3.4 and E.3.7.The adult migration for pink salmon in the Susitna River system began about 10 July and termi nated duri ng the third week in August.Si de-scan sonar counts and migration periods for each sampling station are summarized below. •Sonar counts at Susitna Station totaled 113,000 pinks. The migration period started around July 10,with the midpoint occurring on July 25.The migration at Susitna Station terminated on August 21.Seventy-five percent of the escapement passed this region between July 15 and July 29.Fishwhee1 catches indicated that the migration peak had occurred between July 21 and August 3. •At the Yentna Station,36,000 pink salmon were enumerated by the sonar counters.The migration reached this point on approximately July 14,midpoi nt was July 25 and the migration ended on August 20.Between July 21 and August 2,the majority of the pink salmon had passed this station.Fishwheel catches indicated that the migration peak lasted from July 21 to August 6. •Individuals counted at the Sunshine Station sonar site totaled 72,900.The migration did not reach Sunshine Station until approximately July 23,two weeks later than Susitna Station.The midpoint date for the run was 1 August,with completion on August 20.Seventy-five percent of the migration was counted between July 28 and August 9.Fishwhee1 catches showed the migration peak to have occurred between July 29 and August 9. •Talkeetna Station counts totaled 2,529 pink salmon.The migration period was found to be similar to that at Sunshine Station:the migration reached Talkeetna on July 27,reached a midpoi nt on August 6 and ended on August 20.Seventy-five percent of the escapement passed Talkeetna Station between July 29 and August 9.Peak fishwheel catches occurred between August 1 and 10 • •At Curry Station,the pink migration began on July 31, reached a midpoint by 8 August and terminated approxi- mately August 19.Between August 4 and 19,75 percent of the escapement passed Curry Station. Popul ati on estimates deri ved from tag and recapture data indicate that approximately 49,500 pink salmon passed Sunshine Station,2,300 passed Talkeetna Station and 1,000 passed Curry Station in 1981,while 444,000,73,100 and 59,000 passed the same stations in 1982. E-3-24 E-3-25 The migrational rates based on plots of sonar and fishwheel catch data indicate that pink salmon took an average of three days to reach Yentna Station from Susitna Station t a distance of approximately 6.2 miles.This represents an average travel speed of approximately 1.9 mil es/day. Between Susitna Station and Sunshine Station,the average travel time was 9 days with a travel rate of 6.2 miles/day. Travel time between Susitna Station and Talkeetna Station was approximately 12 days with a travel rate of around 10 km/day.Tag and recapture data on pink salmon indicate that travel time between Sunshine and Talkeetna Station ranged from 2 to 30 days.Pink salmon averaged three days of travel time or 6.2 miles/day between Talkeetna and Curry Stat ions with a range of travel time between one and thirteen days. Spawni ng surveys in the mai nstem Sus itna Ri ver di d not reveal any spawning pink salmon.Spawning surveys in sloughs and side channels documented spawning pink salmon in Sloughs 3A,8 and A and al so in Whi skers Creek,Chase Creek,Lane Creek t Fourth of July Creek t Fifth of July Creek,Skull Creek,Sherman Creek,Indian River and Jack Long Creek.The highest peak spawni ng count withi n an index area was in Lane Creek where 291 fi sh were recorded. Peak spawni ng occurred ina ten-day peri od from August 19 to August 28.The stream survey counts are index counts and do not refl ect the total number of spawni ng fi sh present in the stream surveyed. Based on general information from other pink salmon produc- ing areas in Alaska,female pink salmon produce an average of about 2,000 eggs (Bailey 1969).Eggs hatch in mid- wi nter about 3-5 months after they are spawned,but fry remain in the gravel until April or May.Spawning and time of fry emergence are related to temperature regimes of the streams (Sa il ey 1969).Pi nk salmon fry are about 1 inch long when they emerge and migrate directly to the sea. Limited information for the Susitna drainage indicates that sac fry of pink salmon appeared on March 23 in Slough 11 and Indian River and yolk sac absorption for pink fry was approximately 50 percent on April 11 (ADF&G 1981d). (ii)Other Anadromous Species -Bering Cisco The Beri ng ci sea is a coregonid that occurs from the Beaufort Sea to Cook Inl etc Al though Beri ng ci sco have been collected from upper Cook Inlet and the Knik Arm t the species was not known to inhabit the Susitna River drainage prior to 1980-1981 ADF&G studies.Interior and western Alaskan populations appear to be comprised of both anadromous and freshwater resident forms.Susitna Ri ver Beri ng ci SCQ appear to be anadromous (ADF&G 1981e)• """' - ,~ - - '"'"' - """ - - :~ - Bering cisco were collected in the lower Susitna River between RM 30.1 to RM 100.8 from August to October 1981. The catch rate gradually increased during this period until it peaked between September 17 and 21;after September 23 catchesdecl ined rapidly.Ninety-five percent of the fish collected were captured between RM 70.0 and RM 100.8.The fi sh were apparently undertak i ng thei r spawni ng mi grat i on up the Susitna River from Cook Inlet in August and arrived at Sunshine Station (RM 79)over a five-week period from August 25 to September 30. Although spawni ng acti vity may occur throughout the reach between RM 30 and RM 100,surveys were able to identify only three spawning concentrations at RM 78-79,76-77.5 and 74.3-74.8.Spawning substrates were composed primarily of 1 to 3 inch gravel.Peak spawning occurred during the second week of October.Susitna Ri ver Heri n9 ci sco appear to occupy their spawni ng grounds 15 to 20 days.After spawni ng,thesefi sh probably rapidly migrate downstream to sea (ADF&G 1981e). -Eulachon The eulachon is an anadromous member of the smelt family that spends most of its life in the marin.e environment. Adults are believed to live at moderate ocean depths in the vicinity of the echo-scattering layer and in close proxi- mity to shore.In the northern portion of its range, eul achon do not spawn until May. During 1982,the spawni'ng migration appeared to be composed of two segments -an early run that started pr i or to May 16 and ended around May 31,and a 1ate run that started about June 1 and ended around June 10 (Tables £.3.10 and E.3.11). The migration runs usually take place in larger rivers (such as the Susitna mainstem),but spawning grounds may be located in tributary ·systems.Eulachon are known to util i ze the Sus itna Ri ver system at 1east as far upstream as RM 48 (Trent 1982). (iii)Resident Species -Dolly Varden Char Dolly Varden char are an important sport fish and are dis- tri buted throughout Al aska where the speci es occupy aquatic habitats ranging from coastal streams to lakes and streams located far inland.Dolly Varden occur in Alaska in both anadromous and freshwater resident forms.However,indica- tions are that in the Susitna drainage,Dolly Varden are not anadromous.Dolly Varden reach sexual matur i ty at age 4 to age 7 and normally spawn in clear water streams during the fall. E-3-26 Only two Dolly Varden were taken in the Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon reaches from November through May 1981.From June through September 1981,the occurrence of Dolly Varden increased Catches of Dolly Varden peaked in June and late September;largest catches per unit effort were recorded at the mouths of tri butary streams.Hi gher catches duri ng late June and July coincided with peak migration periods of pink,chum and sockeye salmon;higher catches during September can be attri buted to Dolly Varden movi ng into their spawning areas within clear water tributaries and the beginning of out-migration into their wintering habitat. Sexua 11y mature fi sh were found in September and October and Dolly Varden displaying spawning behavior were observed on October 2 in Upper Indian River (AOF&G 1981e). -Rainbow Trout Rainbow trout are one of the most valued sport fishes in North America.Susitna Ri ver sport harvest and effort 1eve 1 shave steadi 1y increased over the past fi ve years. The general life history is discussed by Morrow (1980)and Scott and Crossman (1975). Low numbers of rai nbow trout were collected throughout wi nter months (November-May 1981)from RM 10 to RM 133 at seven tributary and four mainstem locations.During summer (June-September 1981),rai nbow trout were captured from RM 10 to RM 148 near Portage Creek but not in the impoundment reach.Portage Creek represents one of the northernmost boundaries of the native range for rainbow trout in North America.The most consi stent catches were associ ated with tri butary mouths and sloughs between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon.Age groups 2,4,and 5 made up a majority of the fish collected (ADF&G 1981e). Catches peaked in late June between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon and again during the first two weeks of September throughout the drainage.The June peak was probably due to the presence and movements of spawning fish,while the high in September probably reflected movement downstream into winter habitat (AOF&G 1981e). -Arctic Grayling The Arctic grayling is also one of the most important sport fishes of Alaska and Northern Canada and contributes substantially to the sport fishery of the Susitna River and its tributaries.Grayling are generally residents of clear,cold streams and lakes (Scott and Crossman 1973). E-3-27 - - ~, - Sil t-l aden gl aci a 1 systems,such as the Sus itna Ri ve~,are believed to support relatively few grayling;however,such systems man provide essential migratory channels and over- wi nteri ng habitat (AOF&G 1981e).The Arctic grayl ing is characterized by Reed (1964)as a migratory species. During spring breakup,from April to June,adults migrate from ice-covered lakes and large rivers into clear, gravel-bottomed tr i butari es to spawn (Morrow 1980).In Alaska,Arctic grayling reach sexual maturity at age 2 to 7 years and are capable of spawning several times during their lifetime.After spawning,the adults move from the spawni ng areas to spend the rest of the summer feeding on aquatic and terrestrial insects taken from the aquatic drift (Vascotto 1970).A downstream migration back to overwi nteri ng areas in 1arge ri vers and deep 1akes occurs in late August to mid-September (Pearse 1974). Ouri ng 1980-81 AOF&G studi es,grayl i ng were captured be- tween Al exander Creek (RM 10.1)and the upper reaches of the impoundment area.Catches were low throughout wi nter months,but increased sharply in May,both below and above the impoundment area.Below the impoundment area,catches increased during the period May 1-15 and then declined at a 11 habi tat 1ocat ions throughout the summer unt il catches again increase at tributary mouths in September.Within the impoundment area,catches were highest in June and Ju ly in upper stream reaches and decl i ned towards the end of summer and early fall (Table E.3.12). Changes in distribution and catch of grayling appeared to be associ ated with mi grat i anal movements to spawni ng grounds and overwintering areas that may have been initi- ated in response to surface water temperature (AOF&G 1981e).Below the impoundment area,high catches in May could be associated with migration from the mainstem Susitna into nonglacial tributary spawning grounds.High catches in September are probably associ ated with mi gra- tional movements back to overwintering areas in the mainstem Susitna. Within the impoundment area in May and June,grayling appeared to move upstream into pool-type habitat in tribu- tari es where they had spawned.The movement may be associ- ated with increasing water temperatures (ADF&G 1982a).As surface water temperatures began to decrease in late summer and early fall,lower numbers of fish were observed in these upper stream reaches and tagged fi sh were observed migrating downstream.Small-scale distribution patterns and abundance within upper stream reaches appeared to be determi ned primarily by streamflow and channel morphology. Preferred grayl i ng habitat appeared to be characteri zed by high pool/riffle ratios,large deep pools and moderate velocities (AOF&G 1982a). E-3-28 Additional distribution patterns in the impoundment reach were documented by tagging and releasing 2,511 grayling during 1981 (ADF&G 1981f).Many tributary fish appeared to move into the Susitna mainstem for overwintering.Analysis indicates that there is a wide range of intertributary migration as well as movement within individual tributaries.There were also indications that: •The proposed impoundment area is occupied by grayling that make use of other tributaries in regions that will not be inundated;and •Overwintering areas are available outside the proposed impoundment zone. Grayling population estimates were made only for the im- poundment reach.The estimate was 10,300 gray1 ing over 6 inches long (95 percent confidence level)with a range of 9,200 to 11,700.This estimate would indicate an average of approximately 500 adult grayi ng per c1 ear water tri bu- tary mile or 120 per river mile including the mainstem Susitna in the area to be inundated,assuming an even dis- tribution.Population estimates for individual tributaries are given in Table E.3.13. There was no evidence of spawning at any sampling locations between Cook In1 et and Devi 1 Canyon or in the impoundment reach during 1981.However,it is speculated that adult grayling from the mainstem Susitna below Devil Canyon mi- grate into nonglacial tributaries to spawn some time in late April or May.In the impoundment reach,it is thought that spawning occurs from late April through early May under ice or during mid-May spring floods in the lower reaches of all ei ght tri butary samp1 es.Suitable spawni ng habitat,i.e.,proper spawning gravel in pool regions,was observed in each stream (AOF&G 1982a).Assuming other conditions for spawning are favorable,it is not considered likely that spawning habitat is a limiting factor for gray1 ing. -Lake Trout lake trout were collected only in Sally Lake and Deadman Lake located upstream from Dev;1 Canyon.Both 1 akes sup- port a limited sport fishery.Of the two lakes,only Sally Lake will be inundated by the proposed Watana impoundment. All lake trout were captured within 128 ft of the shoreline in less than 5.9 ft of water.A total of 35 lake trout were captured,32 in Sally Lake and 3 in Deadman Lake.All Deadman Lake fi sh were captured by hook and 1i ne,wh i1 e gi 11 nets produced the greatest results in Sa 11y Lake.Age group 5 dominated the collections.During mid-August,both pre-and post-spawni ng 1 ake trout were captured in Sa 11y Lake. E-3-29 - - - - - - -Burbot In Alaska,burbot are distributed in the Susitna and Copper rivers,Bristol Bay drainages,throughout the interior and in the arctic (McLean and Delaney 1978).Burbot mature between age 3 and 6 in Alaska and may live a total of 15-20 years.Spawning generally occurs between mid-December and April in shallow water over a substrate of sand or gravel. Movements and migration of bur bot are not well documented. Burbot support a limited sport fishery in the Susitna. During winter (November,1980 through May,1981)burbot were captured throughout the reach between Cook In 1et to Devil Canyon.The highest catch rates were recorded downstream of Ta"'keetna part i cul arly at the mouth of the Kroto Creek and Al exander Creek as well as four mai nstem sites upstream of Talkeetna. During summer,distribution of burbot and catch rates between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna and "in the impoundment reach increased as summer progressed with maximum in September.In the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach, distribution declined from early June until mid-July,then increased along with catch rates thoughout the remainder of summer.In the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach,burbot catches during low flows were restri cted to the mai nstem, deeper sloughs and side channels.During high flows, burbot were captured at a greater number of locations including shallow side channels,sloughs and tributary mouths (ADF&G 1981e). Age groups 4,5 and 6 made up the majority of burbot caught in the impoundment zone and age groups 4,5 and 8 made up the majority of burbot caught between Cook Inlet and Devil Canyon.Population estimates were not made in any of the reaches (ADF&G 1981e,1981f). Although no observat ions of spawni ng burbot were made during the 1980-81 season,collection of female burbot in early September with well developed eggs and collection of spent burbot from November to May suggested that lower Susitna Ri ver·burbot may spawn between December and January.Both sexually ripe and unripe mature burbot observed from June through September indicate that nonconsecutive spawning occurs for Susitna River burbot. Location of spawning and rearing areas in the Susitna were not documented,although juvenile burbot were captured at the Alexander and Kroto creeks (ADF&G 1981e). E-3-30 -Round Whitefish Round whitefish are distributed across all of arctic and interior Alaska.They are normally abundant in clear water streams with gravel-cobble substrate but can be found in 1 arge gl aci a 1 ri vers and 1akes.Wh itefi sh mature at age 4-7 and spawning occurs in late September through October over gravel substrate in the shallows of rivers and inshore areas of lakes (Morrow 1980).Upstream migrations are often associated with spawning. Round whitefish were captured at only four locations (all below Talkeetna)during 1980-1981 winter studies.The fish were a 11 captured as they moved upstream dur i ng March and May.The presence of whitefish near the mouths of tribu- tary streams in March and May after none had been caught in the same locations between November-February,indicates a general pattern of movement into the various tributaries in the spring (ADF&G 1981e). During summer,the incidence of fish in catches between Cook Inl et to Devil Canyon was hi gher and peaked in June and September.The most productive sites were Anderson Creek,Slough 10 and 11 and Portage Creek mouth.Most pre- valent age groups were age 3,4,and 5 (ADF&G 1981e). During summer,round whitefish were also captured in the impoundment reach with the percentage of incidence dropped Ju ly to September.Jay and Kosi na Creeks were the most productive areas for round whitefish in the impoundment reach.Age group 7 was encountered most frequently (ADF&G 1981f). -Humpback Whitefish In Alaska,there are three closely related species of whitefish in the genus Coregonus:the humpback whitefish, Alaska whitefish and the lake whitefish.Because of si mil ar appearance and overl appi ng di stri but ions,the data collected on the three species has been reported under the general heading of humpback whitefish. Alaska whitefish are largely stream inhabitants and under- take lengthy up-and downstream migrations to and from spawni ng grounds.Spawni ng occurs in September-October. Lake whitefish occur primarily in lakes but spawn only in rivers or creeks.Spawning occurs between October and December.Humpback whitefish is apparently the only species of whitefish that can be considered anadromous although mi grat ion habits vary wi de ly indifferent systems. Spawni ng mi grat ions generally begi n in June with spawni n9 in October-November (Morrow 1980). E-3-31 - .~ - - .- - Duri ng wi nter,a si ngle humpback whitefi sh was captured be low the mouth of Montana Creek.Duri ng summer,peak catches were made in ear ly June and 1ate September (ADF&G 1981e)•Largest catches per uni t effort were recorded at the mouth of Anderson Creek,the mouth of Portage Creek, and a slough at RM 23.8.Generally humpback whitefish were most abundant in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach.Fish collected ranged from ages 2 to 7;age 4 was the predomi nant age group (ADF&G 1982e). No evidence of humpback whitefish spawning was collected at any sampl ing location betweek Cook Inlet and Devil Canyon in 1981.Inspections of dissected fish caught from mid- September to early October showed well·developed gonads but fi sh were not ready to spawn.Because no whitefi sh were caught or observed after 7 October,it was specul ated that spawning must occur sometime after this date (ADF&G 1981e)• -Longnose Sucker The longnose sucker,the only representative of the sucker family found in Alaska,is ubiquitous and occurs in most of the mainland drainages.Spawning usually occurs in spring after ice out.Spawning runs (i .e.,movement from lakes into inlet streams or from deep pools into shallower gravel-bottomed stream areas)are initiated when water temperatures exceed 5°C.The longnose sucker feeds almost exclusively on benthic invertebrates but will occasionally ingest live or dead fish eggs (Scott and Crossman 1973). Longnose suckers were coll ected throughout the study area from Cook Inlet to the upper reaches of the proposed impoundment area.No specimens were coll ected duri ng w"inter sampling.During summer,adult suckers were captured in the impoundment zone from May-September, generally near the confluence of the tributary streams (ADF&G 1981f).Duri ng the same period,the percentage of habitat locations where fish were collected was relatively hi gh in June from Cook Inl et to Devil Canyon with lower catches recorded duri ng July and August.The percentage increased again during September from Cook Inlet to Talkeetna but not between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon • Anderson Creek,Kroto Creek,Sunshi ne Creek and mai nstem Susitna River (RM 40.6)were the most productive locations. The most preval ent ages were 4,5 and 6.Juvenil es were consistently captured below Curry Station.Their di str i but i on sh i fted downstream as the season progressed (ADF&G 1981e). E-3-32 -Threespine Stickleback Threespine stickleback generally inhabit shallow areas in bays,estuaries and in rivers not more than a hundred miles upstream from the coast.Wi nteri ng areas tend to be in deeper waters.Stickleback feed mainly on small crusta- ceans and insects. Threespine stickleback were collected in the Cook Inlet to Devil Canyon reach of the Susitna Ri ver from Al exander Creek to the mainstem Susitna Island site.Catches per unit effort in the Cook I nl et to Ta lkeetna reach were hi gher,overall,than those in the Ta lkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.The number of habitat 1ocat ions that pro- duced threespi ne stick 1eback was hi ghest in June and de- clined steadily to September.The higher percentage in early summer indicated that fish had been involved in spring spawning movement.This activity was not observed in September (AOF&G 1982a). -Cottids All sculpin species captured in the Susitna River have been grouped under the general heading of cottids.The sl imy sculpin is the most common cottid found in the Susitna, although there is a possibility that three other species may be present below the impoundment area. Between November 1980 and October 1981,cottids were cap- tured throughout the Cook Inl et to Devil Canyon reach of the Susitna River (AOF&G 1981e).The catch rate in the impoundment area from May to September was O.ll/trap day (AOF&G 1981 f).The percentage of sampl i ng 1ocat ions pro- ducing catches in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna portion of the reach,reached a high in late August and a low in late July.For the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach,there was a high in early July and a low in late September.Habitats associated with clear water tributaries consistently pro- duced the hi ghest catches throughout the study area from Cook Inlet to above the proposed impoundment zone (ADF&G 1981e,1981f). -Lamprey The Arctic lamprey,one of four lamprey species that occurs in Al aska,was observed in the Susitna Ri ver duri ng 1981 (ADF&G 1981e).The Pacific lamprey,an anadromous species that has been reported to range into the Lower Susitna River (Morrow 1980)was not observed during 1981 investigations. E-3-33 - - - - - ,~ ,- - - (b) Some populations of Arctic lamprey are composed of both anadromous and freshwater forms.It was specul ated that a portion (30 percent)of the Susitna population is anadro- mous based on analysis of length frequencies (ADF&G 1981e). The anadromous form is parasitic;hosts include adult salmon,trout,whitefish,ciscoes,suckers,burbot and threespine stickleback (Heard 1966).The freshwater forms have been reported to be both parasitic and non-parasitic. Arctic lamprey spawn during the spring in streams of low to moderate flow.Eggs develop into a larval stage,which spend one to four years burrowed into soft substance. After an indefinite period,adults migrate upstream to spawn. Arctic lamprey were captured at 14 sampling sites between RM 10 and RM 101 that were surveyed from November 1980 through September 1981.During the winter surveys,the only habitat site to produce Arctic lamprey was Rustic Wilderness,where one lamprey was captured.All other lamprey were collected during the summer months.Lamprey were not collected in the impoundment area (ADF&G 1981e). The highest catch frequency was recorded during the September 1 to 15 s ampl i ng per i od •All 1 amprey taken were collected at tributary sites downstream of RM 50.5.The lowest incidence of capture for this species during the summer was observed in the July 16-31 sampl ing period (ADF&G 1981e). Habitat Utilization The physical conditions associated with the free-flowing charac- teristics of the Susitna River provide essential aquatic habitat for fishery resources.Alteration of this physical environment would ultimately affect associated fish populations.The complex- ity of the aquatic habitat and physical interactions that exist is compounded by the effects of seasonal and yearly fluctuations in physical habitat components. Most of the basel ine description forSusitna River aquatic habitat presented below is based on reports of habitat ev~uation studies conducted by ADF&G during the 1980-81 winter and 1981 summer field seasons (ADF&G 1981c,1982a)and by results of continuing studies in the 1981-82 season.These studies have attempted to identify seasonal habitat characteristics of selected anadromous and resi- dent species within the study area. Species occurrence,relative abundance,and the significance of aquatic habitat to species and important life history stages ;s discussed below for each of the three defined study reaches. E-3-34 The gradation of habitat types available in the Susitna River were grouped into four classes:mainstem,side channel,slough and tributary mouth.Each of these habitat types encompass a range of physical attributes rather than a set of fixed characteristics. -Mainstem habitat consists of that portion of the Susitna River that conveys streamflow at all times.Both single and multiple channel reaches are included in this category.The physical characteristics of mainstem habitat in the Susitna River reflect the integration of the streamflow,sediment,and thermal regimes of the upstream basin with the topography and geology of a par- t i clJl ar river segment.Groundwater and tributary i nfl ow are generally inconsequential contributors to streamflow within a river segment.Total sediment load and suspended sediment con- centrations are primarily dependent upon gl acial melt.Stream temperature responds primarily to metrological conditions and directly influence intergravel water temperatures (Trihey 1982)• -Side-channel habitat consists of those portions of the Susitna River that normally convey streamflow during the open-water season but which become appreciably dewatered during periods of low flow.In general,shallower depths,lower velocities and small er streambed materi al s occur in si de-channel s than occur in the mainstem.However,the streamflow,sed iment and thermal regimes of side-channel habitats respond directly to mainstem conditions.Tributary and groundwater inflow may prevent side- channel habitats from becoming completely dewatered as mainstem flows receed;however,the presence of these inflows is not con- sidered a necessary component in order for side-channel habitat to exist (Trihey 1982). -Sloughs are spring-fed perched overflow channels which convey glacial meltwater from the mainstem during moderate and high flow periods.At intennediate and low flow periods,the sloughs convey cl ear water from local runoff,tributary inflow and groundwater.Sloughs aregenerall y found on the downsream side of old,well-vegetated point bars.The streambed elevation in a slough is notably higher at the upstream entrance than at the mouth,sloughs function like small stream systems.Several hundred feet of channel exist in each slough which convey water without the influence of the mainstem backwater (Trihey 1982). The physical characteristics of the slough habitat appears to depend upon the interaction of four principal factors:the dis- charge of the mainstem Susitna River,surface runoff patterns from the adjacent catchment area,local groundwater flow contri- butions,and ice processes within the river system.These four principle factors interact to varying degrees during different portions of the year to provide a unique habitat type along the margins of the Susitna River (Trihey 1982). E-3-35 - - - - - - .- ""'" ",... The amount of streamflow in the mai nstem of the Susitna Ri ver influences habitat conditions in the sloughs in two ways:1) causes a backwater effect at the mouth of the slough which facil itates access into the slough and 2)fl ushes debri sand fi ne sediments from the slough.Local surface runoff con- tributes a greater portion of the clear water flow to the slough than the groundwater upwelling during the ice-free period of the year.Ouri ngwinter months,groundwater provides nearly all of the "flow which exists in the sloughs.Even flow that enters the slough from a tributary originated in the tributary as ground- water.The groundwater upwelling in the sloughs,maintains an open-water conditions (Trihey 1982). Ice processes in the mainstem river are also very important in maintaining the character of the slough habitat.Besides flush- ing debris and beaver dams from the sloughs which could be potential barriers to upstream migrants during periods of low flow,mainstem river ice processes are also considered important for maintaining groundwater upwelling in the sloughs (Trihey 1982)• -Tributary habitat consists of the full complement of habitats which occur in the smaller tributary streams of the Susitna River.The streamflow,sediment,and thermal regimes reflect the integration of the hydrology,geology and climatology of the tributary drainage.Therefore,physical characteristics of tributary habitat are not dependent on mainstem conditions which exist at the tributary mouth.The stage of the mai nstern ri ver causes a backwater effect whi ch extends into the tri butary and the tributary flow creates a clear water plume in the mainstern. This interaction provides another type of habitat (tributary mouth)which is considered a subset of tributary habitat (Trihey 1982)• (i)Impoundment Zone The impoundment reach of the Susitna Ri ver from Devil Canyon to the Oshetna Ri ver flows through a steeply cut, degradi ng channel.From the Devi 1 Canyon damsi te upstream to Fog Creek,the river forms one channel,which lies in a deep vall ey wi th an average gradi ent of 20 ft/mi 1e.From Fog Creek to the Oshetna River,the river is wider and often spl its into two or more channel s with an average gradient of approximately 12 ft/mile.Substrates through- out the impoundment reach and mouths of tributaries gen- erally consist of rubble,cobble and boulders,often embedded in sand;gravels are present in some locations (ADF&G 1981c). Because of the inaccessibil ity of the Devil Canyon area and the apparent lack of suitable fisheries habitat,the study area was limited to that section of the Susitna River from Fog Creek to the Oshetna Ri ver (ADF&G 1981c).Based upon a E-3-36 preliminary reconnaissance of the upper Susitna River basis (AOF&G 1977),eight major tributaries were selected for fi sheri es studi es:Fog and Tsusena creeks in the vi ci ni ty of the proposed Devil Canyon impoundment;and Deadman, Watana,Kos;na~Jay and Goose Creeks and Oshetna River in the proposed Watana impoundment.For the purpose of this study,the first 1.0 mile of these streams from their con- fl uence with the Susitna Ri ver were sampl ed.To assess mainstem utilization~sampling was conducted in an area 300 ft up and downstream of a tributaries confluence with the Susitna. Overall trends for physi ocherni cal parameters measured in this mainstem reach during May to September (ADF&G 1982a) i ncl uded: •Well-oxygenated water (9.0-14.1 rng/l); •pH values near seven or slightly higher (6.8-7.9); •Moderate conductivity values (44-248 umhos/cm); •Water surface temperatures in the range of 1.5-12.6°C; and •Low turbidity levels in the tributaries (0.3 to 19 NTU) compared to the rna i nstern (10 to 175 NTU). MainstemHabitat Near the Confluence of Major Tributaries •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance Although adult chinook salmon were documented to RM 158.2 in 1982,no other anadromous species were reported in the mainstem Susitna in the impoundment reach (Trent 1982). Thi s supports the current opi ni on (ADF&G 1982a)that hydraul ic characteri st i cs of the Susitna Ri ver at Devi 1 Canyon may act as a barrier to upstream salmon movement. Occurrence of resident species in the rnainstem is limited to six species:Artie grayling,longnose sucker~humpback whitefish,round whitefish,Dolly Varden and burbot.The longnose sucker~round whitefish and burbot were almost excl usi vely captured in the rnai nstem near the mouths of the tributaries.Based on tagging studies,the Arctic grayling occupied mainstem locations primari1y during wi nter • •Significance of Habitat The mainstem Susitna River in the impoundment reach appears to provide primary overwintering habitat and es- sential migration routes between tributaries for Arctic grayling (ADF&G 1981f). E-3-37 - _. - (i i) - - - "..,,, - Burbot appear to use the mai nstem immedi ate ly up or down- steam of tributaries as year-round habitat.All burbot catches in the impoundment area were made in the mainstem between May and September (ADF&G 1981f).It is un1 ike1y that tributaries would be utilized during winter months be- cause of ice conditions. Round whitefish and 10ngnose suckers also appeared to use the mainstem near tributary confluences as year-round habi- tat.No spawning or rearing areas were identified (ADF&G 1981f). -Tri butari es •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance At least two resident species,Arctic grayling and cottids, occur in tributaries.Other species captured near the mouths of tributaries are discussed above under Section (i). These species are expected to occur in tributaries. Relative abundance estimates for grayling indicate that approximately 500 grayling greater than 6 inches per clear water tributary mil eare present with a population estimate of 9,20D to 11,700 total for the impoundment zone.Total catch of cottids was 38 in 352 trap days. Significance of Habitat Tributaries are primarily utilized by grayling as spawning and rearing habitat (ADF&G 1982a).A1 though spawning has not been observed in the impoundment zone,suitable spawning habitat (sandy gravel )has been observed in all of the tri b- utaries sampled,and it is likely that spawning occurs in the lower reaches of these tributaries (Morrow 1980).Gray- ling that have completed spawning move upstream into areas that have pool type habitats where they remain throughout the summer.Large,deep streams with a high pool/riffle ratio and moderate streamflow velocity (below 2.0 ft/sec), such as the Oshetna Ri ver and Kosi na Creek,appear to provide opt ima1 habitat (ADF&G 1982a).C1 ear water tri b- utaries produced the highest catch rates for cottids. Talkeetna to Devi 1 Canyon In the reach of the Susitna River from Talkeetna to Devil Canyon the river channel is relatively stable,straight to meandering with minimal braiding,and is restricted by sur- rounding hills.Numerous islands,gravel bars and sloughs are present.Flow alternates between a single channel and split channels throughout the reach.Between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120.7)the approximate gradient is 11.2 ft/mi1 e. Typi ca 1 substrate between Talkeetna and Curry is gravel, rubble and cobble with small amounts of sand and silt.Above Curry the substrate varies from silt to bedrock.The major- ity of mainstem shoreline substrate is rubble and cobble whereas si 1tis the most common substrate in slough mouths E-3-38 slow water areas.Below Curry,streambank vegetation is dense spruce/hardwood forest.Tr i butari es to the Susitna River in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach include Whi skers Creek,Lane Creek,Fourth of July Creek,Gold Creek,Indian River and Portage Creek,in addition to num- erous smaller streams draining the surrounding hillsides. A breakdown of the habitat study sites in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach includes 11 slough sites,8 mainstem or side channel sites and 5 tributary sites.Range for phys- iochemical parameters measured in this reach from IVlay to September,1981 are shown in ADF&G (1982a).Ranges given for tributary sites included all of the sampling sites from that particular tributary.Overall trends for physiochemi- cal parameters measured in this reach included: •High dissolved oxygen (8.8-12.8 mg/l); •Moderate conductivity readings,(15-222 umhos/cm); •pH valves in the range of 5.1-7.8,slightly lower than the impoundment reach or downstream..Ti rbutari es,such as Whiskers Creek and Indian River,had slightly lower pH values than mainstem or slough sites; •Turbidity levels were generally lowest at upstream tribu- tary sites (0.4-148 NTU).Levels were also generally lower in downstream tributary sites and sloughs when the influence of the mainstem Susitna was negligible.Levels were highest in the mainstem (23-230 NTU);and -Mainstem and Side Channels T·h~·s.usitna Ri ver from Talkeetna'to Devil Canyon has a typical split channel configuration.A split channel river is characterized by numerous stable islands that divide the flow into two channels.The banks of the channels are typically vegetated and stable,and the floodplain is nar- row relative to the channel width.There are usually no more than two channels in a given reach and other reaches are si ng1 e channel.Bed load is depos ited at low flow to .'form gravel bars along the sides or in the middle of the channels.These bars are typically more erodible than the banks.The bars,rather than the'banks,are eroded duri ng floods,fesu)ting in a latera11y.stab1e channel • .'.,,(..'..':. Side channels in a split river configuration may be perched and carry no water during periods of low flow.Maximum flow depths and velocities are typically less than in the active channel,resulting in smaller substrate materials. Because the mainstem provides the primary side-channel in- flow,side-channel and mainstem water qualities are simi- 1 are E-3-39 - - ,- -- - - •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance ••Sal man Five species of Pacific salmon were observed in the mainstem or side channels of the Susitna above Talk- eetna.Studies indicate that adult salmon utilize the mainstem above Talkeetna from late spring into the fall during migration and spawning periods (ADF&G 1981b).Approximate use peri ods for each speci es are: Chinook-mid-June through July; Sockey-July 23 through mid-August; Coho-July 30 t~rough September; Chum-July 28 through September;and Pi nk-July 27 through August. Relative abundance estimates based on 1981 escapement data and population estimates are given in Table 3.4 for each for the salmon species that util ize this reach of the Susitna mainstem. Juvenile salmon are also present in the mainstem at various times of the year.Approximate periods of use and relative abundance are outlined below. Chinook -During winter,juveniles were most abun- dant in the mai nstem.Pri or to June 1 through the end of July,age 1+juveniles were abundant as they were observed moving downstream in the mainstem. Coho -During winter,coho are most abundant in the mainstem.During summer they are slightly less abundant in the mai nstem than at the tri butary mouths. The analysis of the 1982 smolt trapping program will provi de an increased understand;ng of juvenil e sock- eye,chum,and pink salmon life history in this reach. E-3-40 Resident Species Resident species reported in this reach included all of the res i dent fi sh reported in the Sus i tna Ri ver drainage (Table E3.2)except for the Arctic lamprey and lake trout.Resident fish observed throughout the year in the mainstem include burbot and longnose sucker.Other resident species were most abundant in the rnainstem primarily during winter,early spring and late fall. •Significance of Habitat Based on existing data it appears as through the mainstem Susitna River between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon is pri- marily used by anadromous and resident species as a migrational corridor and overwintering area.The signif- icance of rnainstem aquatic habitat is discussed below for various species of commercial and recreational impor- tance • ••Salmon The rnai nstem reach from Ta lkeetna to Devil Canyon serves as a migration corridor for a relatively small percentage of the total Susitna River salmon escapement (Table E3.4).During migration periods, various behavioral and distribution patterns appear to be associated with certain characteristics of mainstem habitat.Water depth,velocity,channel configuration and location or absence of obstructions are variables that influence migration paths within the mainstem (ADF&G 1981c). Generally,pa$sage of adult salmon during migration correspondedwilh periods of high seasonal flow, accordi ng to prel imi nary data gathered by ADF&G (l982a).However,passage of adult salmon on a daily basis (measured by sonar),indicated that salmon movements decreased dur i ng per i ods of hi ghest flows (40,000 cfs)and increased as flows subsided following major flow events. It was hypothesized that increased water velocities associ ated with peak flows discouraged passage and encouraged milling (ADF&G 1982a).Preliminary radiotelemetry investigation and gillnetting indicated that the confluence of the Talkeetna,Chulitna and Susitna rivers is a probable chum,coho and chinook milling area and that sockeye,chum,coho and chinook mill in the mainstem one mile below Devil Canyon. E-3-41 - - .~ I ~, - ~' ,.... - - ....... , Little mainstem spawning was observed.Chum were observed spawning at four sites and coho at two 'of the six spawning sites identified in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.Mainstem spawning appeared to be restricted by lack of suitable spawning substrate and upwelling (ADF&G 1982a,1981c). Juvenile chinook and coho salmon appear to use the rna i nstem for overwi nter i ng.Sa 1man j uveni 1es use the mainstem for outmigration. Resident Species Resident species other than burbot and longnose sucker primarily use this area of mainstem as a migration channel to spawning,rearing,and summer feeding areas in tributaries.No mainstem spawning or rearing areas have been located.Rainbow trout and grayling overwinter in mainstem habitats. Burbot and longnose sucker use the mainstem as year- round habitat.Burbot catches during low flows were restri cted to the mai nstem and deep si de channel s. Ouri ng hi gh flows,burbotwere captured at a greater number of locations including shallow side channels. -Slough Habitat The clear water originates from local surface runoff and ground water interception.Water upwells in the slough channel throughout the year keepi ng these areas ice free in the winter.Preliminary observations indicate the Susitna River is the primary source of the upwelling water in many of the sloughs.Many have tributary inflow.Local runoff is the pri mary water source in slough habitats in the summer. The stage in"the mainstem controls the water surface elevation of the lower portion of the sloughs by forming a backwater that can extend some distance upstream into the slough.This backwater is divided into two parts--clear water and turbid water.The mainstem water creates a turbi d pl ug at the mouth of the slough,whi ch backs up the clear water in the slough.As the stage in the mainstem drops,the si ze and character of the backwater changes.At lower summer flows,apprOXimately 8,000 to 10,000 cfs at Gold Creek,the backwater recedes.This reduces the depth of water at the entrance to the sloughs.In some cases the slough mouth and the mainstem become separated by a gravel bar. E-3-42 At high flows (20,000 to 24,000 cfs at Gold Creek)the Susitna River overtops the head end of the sloughs substan- tially increasing the flow through the sloughs.These high flows flush the fine sediment5 that accumulate in the lower portion of the sloughs.As peak flows subside and the stage in the mai nstem drops below the head end of the slough discharge drops and the water in the slough begins to clear. In the summer when mai nstem temperatures are rangi ng from 8°to 12°C,i ntergrave1 temperatures in the slough range from 4°to 6°C.Thus,it appears that a significant amount of heat exchange occurs in the gravel s.Some wi nter tem- peratures measured in the sloughs and the mainstem indicate that when mainstem temperatures range from 0.5°to O.loC, i ntergrave1 temperatures ranged from 2°to 4°C Atk i nson 1982)• •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance Salmon Adults and/or juveniles of five salmon species have been observed in slough habitat between Talkeetna and Devi 1 Canyon.Resul ts of escapement and spawni ng surveys i ndi cated that adu1 t sockeye and chum salmon were the most numerous salmon in these sloughs during peak spawning periods (ADF&G 1981b).Pink salmon were somewhat 1ess abundant.The abundance af coho and chinook was also low.Spawning counts for individual sloughs are reported in ADF&G (1981b). Studies of species occurrence and relative abundance of juvenile salmon in slough habitat during 1981 indicate the following information. Compared to other habitats in this reach,juvenile chinook salmon are abundant in all sloughs during winter and relatively abundant in selected clear water sloughs during summer. Juvenile coho salmon are abundant at slough sites during winter and less abundant but still present at slough sites during summer. Abundance estimates for other juvenile salmon are 1 imited.Prel imi nary data indicate that chum,pi nk and sockeye fry were present in slough habitat during part of the summer.A limited number of sockey fry were a1 so observed in slough habitat during winter. E-3-43 ~I .- - - - - ••Resident Species All resident species reported in the Susitna drainage have been observed in slough habitat between Talkeetna a nd Devil Canyon except for Arctic 1 amprey and 1ake trout. Avai 1ab1 e data i ndi cate that most speci es are present in slough habitats as well as the mainstem throughout wi nter.During summer most adult residents are not abundant in slough habitat.Those that were rel at i ve1y abundant in slough habitat duri ng summer included burbot,10ngnose sucker and rainbow trout. Previous studies indicated that juvenile whitefish, grayling and rainbow trout were abundant in slough habitat during late summer (Friese 1975)• •Significance of Habitat Slough habitat between Ta 1keetna and Devi 1 Canyon is used by various anadromous species primarily for spawning and also for rearing and overwintering of juveniles.Slough habitat i sal so important year-round,overwi nteri ng and rearing habitat for various resident species.The sig- nificance of slough habitat is discussed below for species of commercial and recreational importance. Salmon Slough habitat in this reach serves as spawning habitat for sockeye and chum salmon and less important spawning habitat for pink salmon.Factors contributing to the relatively high numbers of salmon that spawn in the majority of the sloughs in this reach are outlined below: Cl ear water·base flows or i gi nat i ng from sources such as upwelling,groundwater,or interstitial inflow,insure maintenance flows. The presence of upwelling clear water in the sloughs oxygenates spawni ng substrate,keeps si 1t from compacting the spawning gravels,and provides a stable temperature regime that maintains i ncubat i ng embyos through the wi nter. The mouths of sloughs act as holding areas in proximity to slough spawning habitat. Sloughs also serve as important rearing and overwin- teri ng habitat for juvenil e chi nook and coho sal mono Ouri ng summer,tri butary sites appear to be more i m- portant chinook rearing habitat,although clear water E-3-44 sloughs al so supply reari ng habitat.Coho juveni 1 es appear to use sloughs and tri butary mouth sites for summer rearing.The importance of sloughs as juvenile overwintering and summer rearing habitat may be related to: Ice-free clear water conditions during winter com- pared to lowered flow and icing in coho and chinook salmon natal tribuatries;and Duri ng hi gh summer mai nstem flows the hi gh stage of the mai nstem acts as a hydraul i c control at the slough outlet and the backwater increases in the lower end of the slough.These cl ear water areas promote benthic production t which improves the qual- ity of the rearing habitat for juvenil~salmon. Resident Species Slough habitat between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon is si gni fi cant as overwi nteri ng habitat for adult rai nbow trout t grayl i ng and whitefi sh t as year-round habitat for adul t bur bot and longnose sucker and as reari ng habitat duri ng 1ate summer months for juveni1 e white- fish,grayling and rainbow trout.The importance of sloughs as overwintering habitat is related to the same factors as discussed above for juvenile salmon. No resident spawning sites were located in the sloughs of this reach t however spawning surveys for resident fish were limited (ADF&G 1981b). Tributary Habitat The mouths of tributaries between Talkeetna and Devil Can- yon are sensitive to changes in rnainstem flow.At high flows,the mainstem creates a backwater at tributary mouths,thus increasing the water depth at the mouth.The lineal extent of the backwater in the tributary depends on the stage in the mainstem and the gradient of the tribu- tary.At low stages t the backwater is elminated,resulting in shallower water and increased flow velocities at the mouth. Small deltas are formed at the mouths of the tributaries. As the tributary enters the mainstem river the change in gradient and subsequent change in flow velocity causes the tri butary to drop transported materi al s.As the stage in the mainstem river drops the tributaries become perched above the river t i.e.,flow across steep deltas.Were they to remain under low mainstem flow conditions t upstream pas- sage of adult salmon and resident fish would be inhibited or eliminated.However t tributary flows are sifficient to E-3-45 ~, - - - - -.,, - - - cut through deltas to establish a channel at a new gradient (R&M 1982f).Tributaries were observed to cut through their deltas during the low flows of August 1982 when the stage in the mainstem altered the gradient of the delta. Even during low flows,most of the tributaries had suffi- cient energy to move the delta material (R&M 1982f).Under regulated mainstem flow conditions,the unregulated tribu- taries would continue to experience peak high flows that would contai n sufficient energy for seuiment movement. •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance ••Salmon Except for sockeye salmon,the salmon species present in the Susitna drai nage were observed in tri butari es within the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.Spawning counts for individual tributaries are given in studies by ADF&G (1981b). Species occurrence and relative abundance of juvenile salmon in tributaries or at tributary mouths varied by season and by species.Results of studies to date are outlined below: Juvenile chinook salmon are most abundant at tributary mouth~during summer.Redistribution of juveniles from areas of emergence in tributaries to more favorabl e reari ng habitat at the mouths of tri butari es occurs throughout the summer as fi sh become more mobile. Juvenile coho were slightly more abundant at tributary mouth sites than mainstem sites during summer. Resident Species All resident species except for burbot,longnose sucker and 1ake trout were most abundant in cl ear water tri butari es and at the·mouths of cl ear water tributaries during summer month.Limited information on winter distribution and abundance indicates that few resident fish overwinter in tributary habitat • •Significance of Habitat Salmon Tr i butary habitat in thi s reach serves as primary spawning habitat for chinook,coho,and pink salmon. Chum salmon also spawn in tributaries but appear to util ize slough spawning habitat more than tributary E-3-46 habitat (ADF&G 1981b).Important spawning tributaries i ncl ude Indian Ri ver (chi nook and coho),Portage Creek (chinook),Gash Creek (coho)and Lane Creek (pink salmon)• Tributaries in this reach also serve as rearing and summer feeding habitat for chi nook and coho.Si tes associated with tributary mouths al so appear to pro- vide important milling and rearing areas for juvenile chi nook and coho salmon.Occurrence of age 0+coho was particularly high at tributary mouth sites (ADF&G 1982a). Resident Species Between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon,tri butari es pro- vide spawning habitat,juvenile rearing areas,and summer feeding habitat for several resident species including rainbow trout,Arctic grayling,round white- fi sh and Dolly Varden (ADF&G 1981e,1982d).In gener- a 1,these fi sh mi grate from mai nstem or s10ugh habitat to clear water tributaries to spawn in spring (or early fall for Dolly Varden).Once spawning migration is completed,fish move into favorable tributary habi- tat for reari ng and summer feedi ng.As freeze-up begins,fish migrate from tributaries to the mainstem or deeper pools near the mouths of tributaries. (iii)Cook Inlet to Talkeetna The Susitna River from Cook Inlet to Talkeetna is moderate" 1y to extensively braided along most of the reach.From the inlet to Bell Island,the river is separated into two braided channels;from Bell Island to the Yentna River a single meandering channel is formed.From the Yentna River to Sheep Creek,the river is moderately to extensively braided,with forested islands and nonforested bars between the channels of the river.The river is reduced to a single channel near the Parks Highway Bridge and braiding becomes moderate from this point to Talkeetna.Gradients vary considerably in this reach.From Cook Inlet to RM 50, gradient is 1 ft/mi1e;from RM 50 to 83,it is 5.9 ft/mile and from RM 83 to Talkeetna,the gradient is 6.9 ft/mile. Typical substrate in the reach is silt and sand with some gravel and rubble.Major tributaries include:Alexander Creek,Yentna Ri ver,Kroto Creek (Deshka Ri ver),Chu1 itna River,and the Talkeetna River.Flows in these tributaries are considerable.As a result,only about 40 percent of the total flow at Sunshine Station originates in the Susitna River and tributaries above the confluence of the Chulitna River (see Chapter 2). Study sites located in this reach included 11 tributary mouth sites,5 tributary sites,8 slough sites,and 5 mainstem and sidechannel sites. E-3-47 - - - - - The ranges for physiochemical parameters in this reach are given in ADF&G (1982a).Trends apparent in this data include the following: •Tributaries,sloughs,and the main'Stem all exhibited high dissolved oxygen readings (7.6-12.9 mg/l). •Conductivity was generally low in the tributaries (19-46 umhos/cm)and moderately high in mainstem and slough sites (29-216 umhos/cm). •pH values were in the 6.1-8.0 range,with tributaries having the lowest pH values. •Turbidity was lowest in tributaries,particularly Caswell and I~ontana creeks (0.3-1.9 NTU),and highest at mainstem and slough sites (2.2-255 NTU). Mainstem and Side Channels Braided river reaches such as the lower Susitna are charac- terized by two or more interconnecting channels separated by unvegetated or sparsely vegetated gravel bars.The active floodplain is wide and sparsely vegetated,and con- tains numerous high water channels and occasional vegetated islands.Active channels are typically wide and shallow and carry large quantities of sediment at high flows.Bars separating the channel s are usually low,gravel surfaced, and easily erodible.The lateral stabil ity of the channel s is quite low;channel s shift by bank erosion and/or by channel diversion into what was previously a high water channel.The lateral activity of channels within the active floodplain of a braided river that carries large quantities of bed load is expected to be high.Gravel deposits may partially or fully block channels,thereby forcing flow out of the channel to develop a new channel. Because braided river channels are wide and shallow,they are more sensitive to flow reductions than the deeper chan- nel s of a spl it channel system,i.e.,a drop in stage coul d result in a substantial reduction in the width of the river and loss of large areas of flow a10ng the margins of the channel. Side channels are typically at higher elevations than main- stem channels and so are more sensitive to fluctuating river stages.They may be compl etely dewatered at low flows.Side channels are not subject to as high flowvelo- cities as main channels and so the substrate is not scoured from these channels as easily •.Water quality in side chan- nels is similar to that found in the mainstem. E-3-48 •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance Salmon Adult salmon are reported in this reach of the main- stem during spawning migration.Generally,the migra- tion period extends from late May into September (specific dates are reported in Section 2.2).The rel ative abundance of adult salmon in this reach ;s high because the entire Susitna salmon run must pass the lower sections in order to arrive at spawning grounds.Population estimates for the number of sal- mon that migrate to various escapement monitoring stations are given in Table E3.4. With the exception of sockeye salmon,the majority of Upper Cook Inlet salmon is thought to originate in the Sus itna drai nage and therefore must migrate through portions of the reach of mainstem between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna. Juvenile chinook salmon are relatively abundant in this reach of the mainstem during winter months. Juvenile coho are less abundant and more often associ- atedwith tributary mouth sites.Relative abundance of sockeye,chum,and pink juveniles was not assessed ADF&G 1981d). Other Anadromous and Resident Species Other anadromous species reported in this reach in- clude Bering cisco and eulachon.Bering cisco are abundant in the mainstem from August to October (ADF&G 1982a)•Eul achon are reported from Cook In 1et to RM 48 (Trent 1982). All resident species reported for the Susitna drainage except for 1 ake trout were reported in thi s reach or the mainstem.Species reported in this reach but not other reaches of the Susitna include Bering cisco, eul achon and 1amprey (ADF&G 1981e)• .Significance of Habitat Salmon Part of this reach of mainstem habitat serves as a migration corridor for the entire Susitna River salmon run.Adult salmon movement during migration periods appears to show some relationship to discharge (ADF&G 1982a). Salmon spawning habitat in the mainstem or side chan- nels of the reach appears to be limited and is compar- able to the spawning habitat discussed for the Talk- eetna to Devil Canyon reach.Of the six mainstem or side channel spawning sites identified,chum salmon E-3-49 - -, - ~, - - occupied six and coho salmon occupied one (ADF&G 1981a).No mainstem or side channel spawning was observed for chinook,or sockeye salmon.Mainstem and side channel spawning habitat is probably restricted because of lack of suitable spawning substrate ~nd upwelling,which contributes to spawning substrate suitabil ity. Mai nstem habitat al so provides important overwi nteri ng for chinook and coho salmon juveniles,limited summer rearing habitat and a migrating channel for smolt out- mi grat ion • ••Other Anadromou5 and Resident Species The mai nstem from Cook Inl et to Talkeetna serves as primary overwi nteri ng habitat and as an important migration channel.Bering cisco and eulachon are ana- dromous species that use the mainstem as a migratory channel from Cook Inlet.Arctic grayl ing,rainbow trout,Dolly Varden,and round whitefish are resident fish that use the mainstemas a migratory channel to tributary spawni ng habitat and as overwi nteri ng habi- tat.The movement from tributaries to the mainstem for overwi nteri ng has been inferred from capture data gathered during the fall and spring near tributary mouths. Mainstem habitat in this reach provides possible spawn- i ng habitat for at 1east three speci es:Ber i ng ci sco, eul achon and burbot.Al though spawni ng acti vity by Beri ngci sco may occur throughout the reach between RM 30-100,three spawning concentrations were identified (see Section2.2(b)).Spawning substrates were com- posed primarily of 1 to 3 inch gravel. Burbot and longnose suckers are present in the mainstem throughout the year and util ize the mainstem for over- wintering,spawning,and juvenile rearing.Habitat utilization within the mainstem is probably similar to that discussed above for the reach of mainstem between Ta 1keetna to Devi 1 Canyon. -Slough Habitat In general,the sloughs below Talkeetna appear to be less dependent on the mainstem Susitna than the sloughs located above Talkeetna and Devil Canyon.Ouri ng peri ods of low flow,the sloughs are primarily fed by tributaries and ground water upwelling and carry clear water.At high flows,the sloughs are essentially overflow channel s for the mainstem and the water in the sloughs becomes quite turbid as it assumes characteristics of mainstem water. Slough water clears as the mainstem stage drops and turbid E-3-50 water no longer enters at the head.Higher velocities associated with higher flows act to flush fine sediments from the slough.Backwaters are created at slough mouths when the river stage is high,but disappear at lower flows. Because they are somewhat independent of mainstem flow,the sloughs in thi s reach may not be affected as severely by changes in the magnitude and timing of flow as those above Ta 1keetna • •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance ••Salmon Chum,sockeye and pink salmon adults were observed in slough habitat (ADF&G 1981b).No estimates of relative abundance were made for salmon that use slough habitat in this reach. Juvenile salmon occurrence and relative abundance in slough habitat is expected to be similar to that reported for the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach. Chinook juveniles are relatively abundant in slough habitat during winter and less abundant during summer. Juvenile coho are less abundant in slough habitat than in tributaries throughout the year (ADF&G 1981d). Resident Fish Occurrence and re 1at i ve abundance of adul t res i dent species in this reach of slough habitat is similar to that discussed for the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.The majority of resident species are present and relative abundance is highest beginning in late summer and continuing throughout winter.Adult resi dents that are most abundant in slough habitat during summer include burbot,longnose sucker and rainbow trout (ADF&G 1981e). Previ ous studi es i ndi cated that juvenil e whitefi sh, grayling andra i nbow trout were abundant in slough habitat during late summer (Friese 1975)• •Significance of Habitat Salmon Based on spawning surveys upstream from Talkeetna, slough habitat in this reach probably serves as spawning habitat for chum/sockeye and pink salmon. Factors that may contribute to the suitability of sloughs as spawni ng habitat are di scussed for the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach. E-3-51 ,em, - - - .... I Slough habitat may also serve as important rearing and overwi nteri ng habitat for juveni 1e chi nook and coho sal mono The importance of sloughs as juveni 1e over- wintering and rearing habitat may be related to factors discussed above for the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach • ••Resident Species The significance of slough habitat is similar to that discussed for the reach between Talkeetna to Devil Canyon.Slough habitat in this reach is utilized as overwi nteri ng habitat for adult rai nbow trout,gray- 1ing and whitefish;year-round habitat for adult bur- bot and longnose sucker;and as rearing habitat during late summer for juvenile whitefish,grayling and rain- bow trout.The importance of sloughs as overwi nteri ng habitat is related to the same factors as discussed above for juvenile salmon species in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach.No spawni ng sites were reported in the sloughs of this reach (ADF&G 1981e). -Tributary Habitat •Species Occurrence and Relative Abundance Salmon All of the salmon species present in the Susitna drainage were observed in tributaries within this reach.Results of previous studies by ADF&G (l980a and 1980b)and 1981 surveys in tributaries upstream from Talkeetna indicate that the relative abundance of spawning for all salmon species in this reach occurs in tributaries. Species occurrence and relative abundance of juvenile salmon in tributaries or at tributary mouths varies by season and by species.Results of studies.to date indicate: Juvenile chinook salmon are most abundant at tribu- tary mouth sites during summer;tributary sites accounted for 95 percent of all juvenil es captured in this reach.During winter~juvenile chinook were less abundant and were captured near tributary mouths. Juvenil e coho were re1 at i ve1y abundant at tri butary mouth sites during both summer and winter. r:-3-52 Resident Species All resident species except for burbot,longnose sucker,and 1 ake trout were most abundant in clear water tributaries and at mouths of clear water tribu- taries during summer.Information of winter distribu- tion and abundance indicates that few resident fish overwinter in tributary habitat • .Significance of Habitat Salmon Tributary habitat serves as primary spawning habitat for all salmon species occurring in this reach. Based on escapement counts and popul ation estimates at monitoring stations along the mainstem,tributaries in this reach provide the majority of spawning habitat for chinook,coho,and pink salmon in the Susitna drainage. Other Susitna River investigations have revealed that all adult salmon mill to some degree in the mainstem and that it is not uncommon to find adult salmon in the mainstem well upstream of their spawning destina- tion (ADF&G 1974 and ADF&G 1975). Tributary habitat in this reach also supports rearing and summer feeding habitat for juvenile chinook and coho salmon.Sites associated with tributary mouths appear to provide particularly important rearing areas for juveni 1e chinook and coho salmon.Occurrence of age 0+coho was particularly high at tributary mouth sites during summer.In addition,tributary mouth sites in these reaches appeared to provide overwinter- ing habitat for juvenile coho salmon. Other Anadromous and Resident Species Tributary habitat in this reach,simil ar to the Talk- eetna to Devil Canyon reach,apparently provides spawning habitat,juvenile rearing·areas,and summer feeding habitat for rainbow trout,Arctic grayling, round whitefish and Dolly Varden (ADF&G 1981e).In general,these fish migrate dudng spring (early fall for Dolly Varden)from the mainstem or slough habitat to clear water tributaries to spawn.Once spawning is completed,fish move into favorable tributary habitat for rearing and summer feeding.As freeze-up begins, fish migrate from tributaries to the mainstem or deeper pools near the mouths of tributaries.Habitat characteristics that influence grayling distribution and abundance within tributary habitat are discussed above for the impoundment reach in Section 2.3(a). E-3-53 - ..... (c)Streams of Access Road Corridor - (i) (i i) Stream Crossings The access road to the Watana and Devil Canyon damsites will depart from the Denal i Hi ghway and proceed south to Watana. From there,the road wi 11 traverse the north side of the Susitna River to the Devil Canyon dam site.A railroad spur from Gold Creek will connect to Devil Canyon.The access road corridor contains at least 37 streams and rivers in both the Nenana and Susitna River drainages. From the Denali Highway to Watana,the road will cross Lily Creek,Seatt 1e Creek and Brushkan a Creeks,as well as numer- ous unnamed streams.These streams are tributaries of the Nenana River,which supports populations of grayling, northern pike,whitefish,burbot,and slimy sculpin in this reach.Tributary streams are assumed to contain at least grayling and sculpin. The upper reaches of Deadman Creek wi 11 al so be crossed by the Watana access road.This creeki s a tributary of the SusitnaRiver and is considered important grayling habitat. Between the Watana and Dev il Canyon dam sites,the access road wi 11 cross Tsusena and Devil Creeks.The streams con- tain grayling and may contain cottids,whitefish,longnose suckers and Dolly Varden. The road will cross the Susitna River approximately 2 miles below the Devil Canyon dam site.Salmon and probably gray- 1 ing,whitefish,cottids and longnose suckers occur in the vicinity of the crossing.The habitat in this reach of the Susitna is considered less productive than in reaches further downstream. The rail road between Dev il Canyon and Gold Creek wi 11 cross Jack Long Creek and Gold Creek.Jack Long Creek contains pink,coho,chinook,and chum salmon.Gold Creek has been documented to contain chinook salmon (ADF&G 1982c).Three unnamed tributaries of the Susitna River will also be crossed.These most likely do not contain fish due to their step gradients,but they are considered important sourc.es of clear water to sloughs 19 and 20,which are salmon spawning areas. Streams Adjacent to Road Corridors In addition to crossing streams,the access road will par- allel some streams,particularly Deadman and Jack Long creeks.The fi sheries resources of both are described in Section 2.4(a)above.Devil Creek also will be paralleled by the access road for some distance. E-3-54 (d)Streams of the Transmission Corridor Transmission 1 ines will be built from Watana and Devil Canyon to Gold Creek and from there to Anchorage and Fairbanks.From Watana to Gold Creek,the transmission line route is primarily south of the Susitna River. Resources of this segment are described in Commonweal th et al (1982).At least 27 major salmon streams including Willow Creek,. Kashwitna River,Talkeetna River,Chul itna River and Indian River will be crossed by the intertie and,presumably,by the additional lines to be built in conjunction with the Susitna hydroelectric project.Many of the streams are 1 ikely to contain grayl ing, rainbow trout,Dolly Varden and cottids in addition to salmon. South of Willow,the transmission line will be routed between the Sus itna Ri verand the Parks Highway for much of its length.It will cross Fish Creek and the Little Susitna River as well as many unnamed streams.The Little Susitna is a productive fish stream and contains coho,pink,chinook,chum and sockeye salmon,as well as rainbow trout,Dolly Varden and grayling.Fish Creek is known to support chinook,sockeye and coho salmon and possibly rainbow trout.The unnamed tributaries to the Susitna River most likely provide salmon spawning habitat. The transmission 1 ine crosses the Knik Arm and proceeds east and south to the University power substation.Knik Arm serves as a migration corridor for five species of Pacific salmon as well as other anadromous species such as eul achon and 1amprey.The trans- mission line will skirt Otter Lake,which is stocked with rainbow trout,and will cross Fossil and Ship Creeks.Fossil Creek is not considered a fish stream.Ship Creek supports popul ations of pink,chum,coho,sockeye,and chinook salmon as well as Dolly Varden and rainbow trout,but due to the heavy development along its reaches,it is not considered prime fish habitat. North of Healy,the transmisson line will cross at least 50 creeks and riversincl ud ing the Nenana and Tanana Ri vers.These are two of Al aska IS maj or ri vers and prov ide hab it at for salmon,grayl ing, whitefish,suckers,burbot,cottids,northern pike and inconnu. Panguingue Creek has been documented to contain coho salmon,Dolly Varden and grayl ing (Tarbox et al.1978a,1978b).The streams in the Little Goldstream vicinity are not considered to be important fi sheries habitat due to their step grad ients.Whil e many of the streams go dry in the summer,some do support grayling populations near their mouths.Little is known about the other streams that will be crossed in this segment. E-3-55 - ~I - - - - 2.3 -Anticipated Impacts To Aguatic Habitat Construction and operation of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project would result in both beneficial and detrimental effects on the aquatic habitat and associated fishery resources in the Susitna Basin. Many of the potential adverse effects can be avoided or minimized through design and/or operation of the project,as will be described in Section 2.4.This section examines the potential effects of the project as proposed in Exhibit A and addresses the impacts likely to be sustai ned as a resul t <of project construction,reservoir fill i ng,and operation of Watana and Devil Canyon dams.Since the project is a staged development,impacts to the aquatic habitat are presented by project stage,phase and river segment.The discussions focus on important anadromous and resident species,with lesser attention being given to other fishery resources. In this section the term ~impact«refers to an effect on fish or utili- zation of aquatic habitats resulting from project-induced changes in the phys i cal character i sti cs of the environment.Impacts refer to effects that are both positive and negative.The project may alter physical characteristics of the aquatic environment that do not effect fishery resources,but these changes are not considered to be impacts. The description of anticipated impacts presented below is a generic statement addressing the types of impacts that have occurred in similar projects or are 1ikely to occur under the vari ous developmental stages of this project.It is based on available baseline information on the biology of the Susitna River fishery resources,predicted changes in physical characteristics,and effects of habitat alterations from similar activities in other basins as found in the literature.The discussion represents the collective understanding of the physical processes,habitat relationships and likely response of fishery re- sources.Many of the statements are specul at i ve in nature and as yet are unsupported by specific project reports.Data collection and analysis programs currently planned orin progress will provide the basis for a quantitative impact analysis and mitigation plan. The majority of the anticipated impacts resulting from the project are associated with construction and operation of Watana Dam.Impacts of a lesser magnitude would likely be sustained as a result of the addition of the Devil Canyon Dam.Watana stage of the project woul d be con- structed first and woul d alter the character of the aquatic environment downstream of RM 238,the upper most extent of the reservoir.The mag- nitude of change in aquatic habitats below the damsites decreases as the distance from the damsites increases.Alteration of the character of existing aquatic environment would be most notable within the im- poundment and the 50 mi 1e reach between the dams ites and Ta 1keetna. Lesser changes are anticipated in the 100 mile reach from Talkeetna to Cook Inlet.Impact issues are generally same in different reaches. E-3-56 Secondary impacts to aquatic habitat are anticipated to arise during dam construction.Most of these potential impacts can be avoided through careful design and siting and by employing good construction practices. (a)Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Habitat Associated with Watana Dam (i)Construction of Watana Dam and Related Facilities The analyzed construct i on effects are those that coul d potenti a·lly resul tin changes to the fi shery resource. These fall into three major areas of construction related act i vity. -Effects of permanent or temporary alterations to water bodies (i .e.,dewatering,alteration of flow regime,or alt~ration of channels); -Changes in water quality associated with the above (such as spills and effluent discharges;and -Direct effects of the construction activities (i.e., blasting,use of chemicals,noise,etc.). Table £.3.14 summarizes a number of the individual con- struct ion acti viti es that reasonably coul d be expected to occur during the construction period.Each is classified under one of the above three categories with the potential direct effects that activity may have on the waterbody. -Watana Dam The construction of the proposed Watana Dam consists of those activities occurring from initial site preparation to filling the reservoir.The proposed dam will consist of a fi 11 structure constructed at RM 184 of the Susitna River.The fill will be approximately 0.75 miles wide, 0.75 long and 88.5 ft high.Over 63 million cubic yards of material will be used to construct the dam. Prior to construction of the main fill structure,access will be provided and site clearing activities begun. During this period housing.administrative and transpor- tation facilities will be required in the site area. Heavy equipment will be brought to the site and construc- tion material will be stockpiled in the immediate site area.In addition,instream construction of two coffer- dams wi 11 be completed.The two cofferdams wi 11 surround the area of the mai n dam constructi on.One dam will be built upstream from the dam site and the other downstream (refer to Figure Exhibit F).The upstream dam will be apprOXimately 800 ft long and 450 ft wide,the downstream E-3-57 - -, ..- - -I I dam will be 400 ft long by 200 ft wide.Water blocked by the upstream cofferdam will be diverted into two 38-ft diameter,concrete tunnels about 4100 ft long.These will be constructed during a two-year period (1985-1987) and will remain in place until the reservoir filling phase begins. The construction of the proposed dam will have a number of effects on the river and its biota.Some effects will be the direct result of construction activities,other effects will result from alteration of the river environ- mentduring construction.Some effects will be temporary, only occurring during certain periods of construction activity and others will be of longer duration. Alteration of Water Bodies The greatest alteration of aquatic habitat during con- struction of Watana Dam will occur at the dam site and in the Tsusena Creek material site.Other material sites wi 11 be located in the impoundment zone at the construction site.At the construction site,the Susitna River is approximately 300 to 400 feet wide in a confi ned vall ey.The ri ver bottom is sand,gravel and boulders;no tributaries enter the Susitna at this poi nt.The first major phase of water body al terati on is the installation of two cofferdams.The area will be permanently dewatered.Burbot,scu1pins,and long- nosed sucker may occupy the dam site dur i ng the open water season.Grayling may overwinter here (ADF&G 1981f).These fish would be displaced to adjacent habitats by construction activity. The movement of fill material s and the actual process of construction of the fill dam are potential contribu- tions to turbidity and siltation.During transport of 63 mill ion cubi c yards of fill materi a1 used in con- structing the dam,a small percentage may be released to the mainstem Susitna River.Since even a small percentage of the 63 mill ion cubic yards represents a large amount of material,there is a potential for turbidity and si ltation impacts from that source.In addition,there is a potential for silts to erode from fill stockpiles and from the dam fill itself.The release of these materials can potentially alter the nearby aquatic habitats during dam construction and may result in fish avoidance of the area.These is also a potential for the release of suspended silts downstream of the dam site through the diversion tunnels leading downstream. E-3-58 The construction of the dam and the presence of the two cofferdams surroundi ng the dam site requires the con- struction of two diversion tunnels to divert water past the construction area~Construction of the two tunnels will require extensive excavation and production of concrete.These excavation impacts have been addressed above and concrete production impacts will be discussed below. Construction and operation of the diversion tunnels may lead to the entrainment of fish into the tunnels and transport below the dam site.Water velocities within the tunnel will serve as a barrier to fish passage upstream.In addit i on,if ri ver transport mechani sms move rocks and other materials into the tunnels,or if the tunnels are not smooth,fi sh may be damaged or abraided while moving downstream through the tunnels. Experiments with fish transport indicate that fish are adversely affected when exposed to velocities in excess of 9.0 ft/sec (Taff et ale 1975). Tunnel velocities are expected to exceed 18 fps during much of the summer.5i nce few fi sh are expected to occupy this area in the summer,little impact is expected.During the winter,the gate will be partial- ly closed to create a head pond approximately 50 ft deep.Entrance velocities of the tunnel are expected to be in excess of 20 fps.The creation of the head pond in conjunction with velocities of this magnitude are expected to adversely affect overwintering resident populations.Grayl ing and other residents move into mainstem habitat to overwinter and physical conditions withi n the head pond wi 11 provide substanti al over- wintering habitat.Entrance velocities of 20 fps would entrain fish into the tunnel resulting in fish mortality. Tunnel operation may cause scouring due to high veloc- ity di scharges at the downstream end of the tunnel s. This could result in removal of smaller gravels~sands and silts from the immediate area of the tunnel dis- charge.The vel oci ties wi 11 also tend to deter fi sh from entering the area immediately downstream of the tunnel (Bates and VanDer Walker 1965,Stone and Webster 1976)• Changes in Water Quality There are a vari ety of water qual ity impacts that coul d potentially occur during construction of Watana Dam. These generally i nvol ve the di scharge of run-off and effl uents.Peters (1978)notes that under present en- £-3-59 ,~ ..... - - -, - vironmental legislation and by use of current engineer- ing practices,most impacts due to such discharges can be mitigated,if not eliminated altogether.Mitigative treatment techniques will reduce the potential for impacts from these sources. Mud-l aden waters from co 11 ected run-off and from ex- cavation of facilities,such as the two tunnels,could represent a considerable source of silt and turbidity to the river.Holding ponds will be used for sedimen- tati on of suspended sil ts pri or to di scharge to reduce potential impacts. The primary change in water qual ity that may occur from Watana Dam construction is increased turbi dity.Thi s would be produced by the increased erosion resulting from dam construction activities.Increasesi n turbi- dity would vary with the type and duration of construc- tion activity and may be a severe local condition,but woul d not be expected to produce a wi de-spread detri- mental effect upon aquatic habitat in the Susitna system.Temperature,dissolved oxygen,nitrogen concentrati on and other water chemi stry parameters are not expected to be affected,a1though O1i nute increases in trace metals could occur due to leaching from exposed soil. Increased turbidity can reduce visibility and decrease the ability of sight-feeding fish to obtain food (Hynes 1966 and Pentlow 1944).This represents a potential decrease in feeding habitat.Many salmonids will avoid s pawni ng in turbi d waters.Many fi sh wi 11 avoi d tur- bi dity and turbid areas.Turbi dity ori gi nat i ng from these sources is often temporary,and associ ated only with actual clearing activities and rainfall events. Siltation (sedimentation)is also associated with these activities.There is a considerable amount of litera- ture dealing with these effects (Burns 1970;Shaw and Maya 1943;Wandard Stanford 1979)particularly the effect on spawning and incubation.A general conclu- sion reached by a review of the literature (Dehoney and Manci ni 1982)is that s il tati on and turbi dity impacts have their greatest adverse impacts on the immobil e eggs and relatively immobile larval fish.In general, siltation can cause significant losses of incubating eggs and fry in redds in the areas affected,part i cu- larly by interferring with oxygen exchange in the redds.Areas of upwelling flow would tend to be im- pacted to a lesser extent that others.Only resident fish are found in this reach potentially affected. These could potentially include Dolly Varden,Arctic E-3-60 grayling,round whitefish,and similar species. Release of suspended materials can also affect other water qual ity parameters i nc1 uding di ssol ved oxygen, BOD,trace metals,pH,and other water quality parameters (Pierce et a1.1970). The production of concrete for tunnel lining,facility construction and grouting can result in the production of concrete batchi ng waste to be discharged.Peter s (1978)points out that the discharge of this waste,if untreated,could lead to detrimental effects on the fish populations and habitat.A particular problem with thi s waste is the need to adjust its pH (10+) prior to discharge. Spills are generally short duration events,but which may have severe impact dependi ng upon the substance spilled.Any substance used around the site or waste produced on-site could potentially be spilled into a waterbody.It is 1ike1y,however,that substances used in large quantities and over greater areas,including fuels and lubricating oils,would be more likely to be involved in spills.Diesel oil will be used in large quantities and will need to be stored in large quanti- ties on-site.New and used lubricating oils will also be commonly used.There is a great deal of 1 iterature (USEPA 1976;AFS 1979)describing deleterious effects caused by oils and waste oils.Aromatic compounds in oils are particularly toxic.Trace metals in waste oil may require the hand1 i ng of waste oil as a hazardous waste under 40 CFR 261-265).If more than 10,000 gal- lons are stored on site an SPCC plan would be required under the C1 ean Water Act and provisions for spill control would be required on site.Solvents,while probably present in much smaller quantities than petro- leum products,are usually considerably more toxic to aquatic life.Other chemicals of concern could include antifreeze,hydraulic oil,grease and paints among others. In general,spills will be most serious if they occur in areas of high biological activity and are not dissi- pated quickly,or if a large area of the waterbody is affected. The number of factors that will affect the severity of spill impact on fish are: -The substance spilled; -The quantity spilled; -The biota present; -The life stages present; E-3-61 - - - ""'" -. -The season; -Mitigation and clean-up;and -Frequency of spi 11 sin that area. As in the case of siltation and turbidity,the less motile life stages are most likely to be impacted, juveniles and adult fish can usually leave an affected area.Due to increased fish mot il i ty andabil ity to clean-up spills in winter,spills have the potential for greater impacts in winter. It shaul d be noted that the use of good engi neeri ng , practices,and a thorough SPCC plan can greatly reduce or avoid the potential for such impacts • •Direct Construction Activities Floodplain gravel mining has the potential to adversely affect aquatic habitats.The alluvial fans at the mouths of Tsusena Creek and Cheechako Creek and the mai nstem Susitna Ri ver are the only proposed fl oodpl ai n material sites.These sites will be operated in accor- dance with guidelines set forth in Joyce,Rundquist and Moulton (1980).Tsusena Creek will be rehabi 1 itated according to the same set of guidelines,but the Cheechako Creek and Susitna River sites will not be- cause they will be inundated by the reservoir.Antici- pated impacts from gravel removal operations i ncl ude increased turbidity due to erosion and minor instream activities,introduction of small amounts of hydrocar- bons from equipment and the possibil ity of accidental spills.These impacts are expected to be temporary and not expected to last beyond site operation.A long-term impact to aquatic habitat is expected at the mouth of Tsusena Creek.The volume of material to be removed will result in a large pit that will become filled with water.This pit will result in increased lentic habi- tat in exchange for lost riparian and upland habitat. Direct construction activities include activities that can be expected to occur throughout the construction of the dam.These activities,for the most part,will not necessarily be confined to limited areas. During construction,some of the first activities to take pl ace wi 11 i ncl ude the cleari ng of areas,con- struction of access roads,stockpiling of construction materials and fuel,movement of heavy equipment,and construction of support facilities.The construction of support facilities and access roads are discussed below.The activities that wi 11 take pl ace,both for support faci 1 ity construction and other construction will i ncl ude cutti ng and cl ear;n9 ; n areas adjacent to and near the stream banks. E-3-62 Removal of cover vegetation will potentially cause a number of effects.One effect of the removal of cover is to increase the potential for greater run-off, erosi on,increased turbi dity and increased di ssol ved solids (Likens et ale 1970,Boreman et ale 1970 and Pierce et ale 1970).These effects are well documented for many types of construct i on.The extent of poten- tial impacts is directly related to the use of mitiga- tive practices to control erosion and run-off induced sedimentation and turibidity.This is discussed under mitigation in Section 2.4.Without the use of proper mitigative practices,erosion and run-off could greatly increase turbi dity in affected areas and result in sedimentation both locally and in areas downstream. Removal of bank cover will also tend to affect temp- erature by exposi ng bank areas to direct sun1 i ght.In addition,the removal of bank cover may a1 so increase the exposure of fish to terrestrial predators,and/or lead to a decrease in their populations (Joyce, Rundquist and Moulton 1980a). The operat i on of hea vy mach i nery in streams wi 11 be reduced through the use of arched cu1 verts to provide passage across streams,however,some i nstream use of heavy machi nery is i nevitab 1e.The pr imaryeffect of heavy machinery will be increased siltation and turbid- ity.The extent of potential impacts due to siltation and turbi dity wi 11 be dependent upon the extent of machi nery operat ion and the substrate of the streams affected (Burns 1970).Smaller substrates tend to be most affected (Burns 1970);however,effects are also dependent upon stream flows in the local area.If velocities are sufficiently high,deposition of sus- pended silts stirred up by the machinery w'il1 not occur locally and the effects could be minor (Shaw and Maga 1943).Since velocities can be expected to vary sea- sonally,the potential for impacts can be expected to vary seasonally as well.Impacts due to machinery induced siltation and turbidity will tend to be of a more temporary nature than that described for cleaning of banks.Potential spills of fuel or other hydrocar- bons are discussed under Water Quality above. Current construction plans do not require any in-stream blasting.Bl asting is planned for areas 500-600 ft from streams as a means of reduci ng the impacts nor- mally associ ated wi th blasting near streams (Joyce, Rundquist and Moulton 1980a).A review of the effects of blasting on aquatic life (Joyce,Rundquist and Moulton 198Gb,Appendix G)indicates that effects from E-3-63 ..- - ,..,. ,~ -, such blasting would probably not be lethal (at least with charges of less than 200 kg of TNT).Blasting effects include increased turbidity and siltation due to loosened soils and dust (see effects described above).The extent of such effects would be dependent upon local conditions and extent of blasting. The transmitted shock waves from the blasting,while pr~bably not lethal,will disturb the fish and at least temporarily displace them from areas near blasting activity.This type of behavior is well documented for a variety of noise sources (VanDerWalker 1967, Latvaitis et al.1977 and USEPA1976). Some excavation is expected to be associated with the construction of Watana Dam and facil ities.Excavation may be specifically expected in conjunction with cof- ferdam installation,installation of the diversion tunnels and installation of culverts.The effects of excavation are essentially similar to those of instream operation of heavy machinery,but with greater release of sediments and turbidity in the stream.Excavation effects wi 11 probably i nvol ve a greater degree of impact to local habitats than previ ously discussed. Some excavated areas will be permanently lost as fish habitat due to replacement of the habitat.Other areas will be temporarily altered as discussed above. Overall,all impacts causing changes in habitat due to siltation and turibidity will be of a temporary nature.The duration of the change will be dependent upon the amount of material released,local flow con- ditions and the time of year (flow regime)it occurs. For major rel eases of materi al it may require the passage of anent ire water-year for conditions to be restored (Dehoney and Mancini 1982). As part of the construction activities,water will be di verted from the streams in the construction area to be used for dust control,drinking water,fire-fighting water,sanitary water,concrete batching,and wet processing of gravel among other uses.The di versi ons will probably be accompli-shed by pumping from local stream segments and intakes wi 11 be designed to avoi d fish impingmentand entrainment. -Watana Camps,Village and Airstrips •Construction and Operation of Camps, Village and Airstrips During peak construction activity for Watana Dam, facilities to house between 4000 to 4800 people are E-3-64 anticipated (see Exhibit A,Section 1.13).The facilities will be located in close proximity to the construction site.The construction camp will be located near Deadman Creek about two mi 1es from the dam and the construction/permanent village will be within a mile of the dam site.Each development will occupy approximately 170 acres.The permanent townsite wi 11 encompass a small (approximate 25 acre)1 ake.The water source for both camp and village will be Tsusena Creek.Sewage wi 11 be treated and the effl uent di s~ charged into Deadman Creek.Utilidors will connect the vi 11 age and camp to the water and sewage treatment facil ities. Alteration of Water Bodies Alteration of water bodies from the construction of camps and related facilities will be confined to the immediate area of the development.Few adverse im~ pacts are anticipated.Gravel or other material required for facilities construction will be mined from upland sites that will be operated and rehabil- itated to minimize erosion.Project facilities will be located 500 ft from water bodies to minimize the potential of increased sediment input to water- bodies. Water will be withdrawn from Tsusena Creek near RM 6 for domestic use in the camp and permanent village. An estimated 1.5 cfs will be required to meet peak demands in both the construction camp and permanent vill age.Th is represents 1ess than one percent reduction in flow during theopen~water season and little impact is expected to result from decreases of thi s magnitude.An 8 percent reducti on is ex- pected during the winter period.Since few fish are expected to overwinter in Tsusena Creek,this is not expected to adversely affect fish populations. The village is proposed to be built around a lake. Erosion from the site could enter this water body during construction.No fish are believed to live in this lake.The impacts resulting from con- struction of camps and related facilities are an- t i ci pated to be confi ned to the i mmedi ate area of development. - - - ".... - - its volume,and the point of discharge will control the extent of potential impact (see Chapter·2 for di scussi on of treatment techni ques).Wastewater effl uents can affect BOD and therefore di ssol ved oxygen,pH,nutrients,trace metals,and buffering of the recei vi ng water.This can affect the water qual ity of the fish habitat (USEPA 1976;AFS 1979; Hynes 1966). No disruption of fish populations are expected during camp and village construction,because there are no fish habitats in the vicinity of these activities. Storm drainage,oily water run-off and fuel spills are expected to occur at both the camp and the vi 11 age,but it is not 1 ikely that oily and sil ty water wi 11 reach Tsusena and Deadman creeks because the developments are nearly one half mile from the creeks.The small lake within the town limits will be more susceptible to intrusions of oily water, storm drainage and fuel spills • ••Indirect Construction Activities Operat i on of the camps wi 11 r esu 1tin increased access to an area that has previously experienced little fishing pressure.The areas potentially' affected woul d be those stretches of Deadman and Tsusena Creeks and the Susitna River that are easily accessible by foot from the camps and the dam site. Studies on these streams have indicated a relatively high percentage of 1I 0 1der il age group grayl ings (up to 9 years)(ADF&Gf).Sport fishing may.remove 1 arger,older fi sh,result i ng ina change in the age distribution of the population. (ii)Filling Watana Reservoir Fi 11 i ng of Watana Reservoir will impact aquatic habitats both up and downstream of the dam.The 9.5 mi 11 i on acre foot reservoir is expected to take approximately three spring runoff periods to fill.The length of time required to fi 11 Watana Reservoir depends on the amount of runoff that occurs duri ng the fill i ng perod.If 1ow-flow years occur,filling will be extended for an additional spring runoff period.Table E.3.17 presents the flows expected during reservoir filling at Gold Creek Station under median flows.Expected flows at Gold Creek exceed the flow regime proposed during reservoir filling in all but the second year of fi 11 i ng where the required flows are provi ded. Impacts to downstream fisheries are summarized in Table E3.16a. E-3-66 Duri ng fill i ng,downstream releases wi 11 be made through one of the diversion tunnels.This will be a low level outlet with limited capability to control downstream water temperatures. -Watana Reservoir Inundation Filling Watana Reservoir will inundate 59 sq mi.This area contains 54 miles of Susitna River mainstem habitat and 28 miles of tributary habitats that would be con- verted from 10tic to 1entic systems with accompanying changes in hydraulic characteristics,substrate,turbid- ity,temperature and nutrient levels.These changes may result in a shift in species composition in the area. Preliminary population estimates indicate that the im- poundment area support at least 10,000 Arctic gray1 ing greater than 6 inches (ADF&G 1981f).In addition to grayling,the impoundment area has populations of burbot, 10ngnose sucker,whitefish,and Dolly Varden (ADF&G 1981f)• Reservoir fill i ng wi 11 begi n in May with the spr i ng run- off flows.Table E.3.15 presents water surface elevation of the reservoir and rates of fi 11 i ng for Watana Reser- voir.The greatest changes in water surface elevation and the most significant impacts will occur during the first year.During May of the first year,the water surface elevation of the reservoir will rise an average of 5 ft per day reaching a depth of approximately 165 ft by the end of the month (an elevation of 1625 ft).In- creases in water surface elevation of 3 ft and 4 ft per day are predicted in June and July,respectively.At the end of the first year,the reservoir wi 11 encompass an area of approximately 13,000 acres.It is expected to have a surface elevation of 1875 ft and depths of 425 ft • •Mainstem Habitats Impoundment of the Sus itna Ri ver by Watana Dam waul d alter the physical characteristics of mainstem habitats and consequently affect the associated fishery re- sources.Burbot,longnose sucker and whitefi sh gener- ally occupy mainstem habitats year-round.Arctic gray- ling usemai nstem habitats for overwintering (ADF&G 1981f).Mainstem habitats would be eliminated in the impoundment and replaced by a reservoir environment. The physical characteristics expected to occur in the reservoir are presented in Chapter 2. E-3-67 (~ ""'" I~ Ouri ng the open-water season,mai nstem habi tats are utilized by burbot.Longnose sucker and whitefish generally occupy mai nstem habitats only in the vi ci nity of tri butary mouths (ADF&G 1981 f).Si nce these fi sh are generally associated with habitats similar to those that may be present in the reservoir,conditions within the reservoir during filling are not expected to adversely affect these species.Burbot,longnose suc- ker,and whitefish are found in glacial lake environ- ments in southcentral and southwestern Alaska (Bechtel Civil and Mineral s,Inc.1981;Russell 1980).These species are expected to utilize reservoir habitats year-round. Whitefi sh and burbot spawni ng areas may be located in mai nstem habitats near tri butary mouths.These areas would be inundated during the first year of filling, probably eliminating their habitat value.Since the habitat in the vicinity of tributary mouths would be changing rapidly,it is unlikely that stable spawning areas (similar to those presently existing)would develop during reservoir filling.The loss of spawning habitat is expected to adversely affect burbot and whitefish production in the proposed impoundment.How- ever,since the water surface elevation in the reser- voir remains constant during spawning and incubation periods for both burbot and Whitefish,any spawning that does take pl ace would probably not be adversely affected during reservoir filling. The reservoir is expected to increase the amount of overwintering habitat available in this reach.Water depth,water quality,and food availability may be critical factors associated with overwintering habitat (Bustard and Narver 1975;Tripp and McCart 1974;Tack 1980).The reservoir is expected to provide adequate depth and water quality conditions for overwintering fi sh.At the end of the first year of fi 11 i ng,water depths would exceed 400 ft.Turbidity levels of the impoundment are expected to be suitable for fish al- though slightly higher than existing winter turbidity levels in the mainstem Susitna River.Particles less than 5 microns in diameter are expected to remain in suspension (Chapter 2).Fish in the project area may overwinter in lakes where available,or in mainstem habitats.Other studies report fish move to lake hab- itats with suspended glacial flour for the reservoir for overwi nteri ng (Russel 1976 de Brugan and l'.1cCart 1974).The reservoi r wi 11 have a surface area of approximately 59 square mi 1 es,whi ch greatly increases the amount of habitat having suitable conditions for overwi nteri ng fi sh.The increase in overwi nteri ng habitat may have a benefi ci ali mpact on fi shery r e- sources of the upper Susitna basin. E-3-68 Wi nter reservoir water temperatures may increase the qual ity of overwintering habitat in the upper Susitna Bas in.Reservoir temperatures in the top 100 ft are expected to be in the range of 1 to 2°C (Chapter 2). Winter water temperatures in mainstem habitats in the proposed impoundment area are near O°C.These warmer water temperatures may benefit fi sh.Ouri ng the wi nter of 1981-1982,fish appeared to seek out water with warmer temperatures in the lower Susitna River.Other investigators have reported fish occupying warmer water areas in the winter (Umeda et al.1981). Aquatic studies in progress will provide further infor- mation to characterize and quantify the effects of a reduction in spawning habitat and an increase in over- wintering habitat. Longnose sucker and grayling generally spawn in tribu- tary habitats duri ng 1ate spr i n9 (Morrow 1980).The reservoir is expected to be fi 11 i ng rapi dly at thi s time of year,perhaps 5 ft per day.Spawning areas in tributary habitats may be inundated before embryo development is complete • •Tributary Habitats Filling Watana Reservoir will inundate portions of six tributaries (Table E.3.16)including Oeadman~Watana, Ko s ina,Jay and Goose Creeks and the Os hetna Ri ver. All of these tributaries support grayling populations. Grayling that depend on habitats inundated by the reservoir would probably be lost.Portions of these tributaries that would be inundated provide spawning and summer feeding areas for grayling. The initiation of reservoir filling in May 1992 co- incides with grayling spawning activities.In the project area Arctic grayling spawn in the clear water tributaries during spring break-up and the embryos take approximately 11 to 21 days to develop (Morrow 1980). Most of the spawning activity appears to take place in the lower portion of the tributaries.Spawning areas in the six creeks will be inundated in May and June of the first year of filling.The water surface elevation is forecast to increase at a rate of 5 ft per day duri ng the spawni ng peri od with increases of 3 ft per day during the latter part of the incubation period. Eggs deposited in inundated areas are expected to be adverse ly effected.Inundat i on of grayl i ng spawni ng areas would be expected to result in sediment deposi- t i on over the embryos.Ouri ng the gray1 i ng spawn;ng E-3-69 - r period,streams generally carry increased sediment loads from hi gh flows and breakup.The sediments carri ed by the stream wi 11 be depos ited at the confl uence with the reservoir.Thus embryos on the stream bottom would likely be covered with sediment and suffocate. Longnosed sucker may spawn in tri butary mouths duri ng the spri ng (ADF&G 1981 f).They are expected to ex- perience the same effects as grayling. Arctic gray1 ing depend on tributary habitats for summer reari ng areas.Grayli ng are not expected to occupy reservoir habitats during the summer as they are not found in lake habitats with turbidity levels similar to those projected to occur in the reservoir (Russell 1980).Grayling densities in tributaries appear to be high averaging 500 fish per mile,indicating that avail ab1 e summer habitats are occupi ed (ADF&G 1981 f). Gray1 ing occupying tributary habitats inundated by the reservoir will 1 ike1y be lost. Approximately 2.3 miles of Deadman Creek would be in- undated by the reservoir at full pool.Presently a waterfa 11 located about 1 mi le upstream from the mouth prevents upstream fi sh mi gration.The reservoir wou1 d e1 iminate thi s barrier and allow fi sh passage to the upper Deadman Creek and Deadman Lake.- Dolly Varden are expected to be slightly affected by the inundation.In the project area,Dolly Varden are residents occupying tributary habitats during the open- water season.Dolly Varden occupy a wide range of habitat types in southcentra1 Alaska including glacial lakes with a wide range of water quality (Russell 1980).It is anticipated that Dolly Varden will occupy reservoir habitat year-round. Dolly Varden spawn in the fall,the embryos incubate through the wi nter and the a1 evi ns emerge in the late spring.Since the reservoir is not fn1ing during the spawning and incubation period,any spawning areas available in the fall would probably not be inundated before emergence • •Lake Habitats Sally Lake and several other small lakes would be in- undated by the reservoir.Sally Lake has populations of 1ak e trout and gray1 i ng that appear to be stunted (ADF&G 1981f).Since grayling populations are not usually associated with gl acia1 lakes or turbid water, E-3-70 the grayling population would likely be lost.Lake trout may be able to survive in the reservoir if an adequate food base exi sts.Lake trout are found in glacial lakes including Chakachamna and Kontrashibuna Lakes (Bechtel Civil and Minerals,Inc.1981,and Russell 1980). -Talkeetna to Watana Dam Table E.3.17 presents a comparison of average monthly pre-project flows and projected monthly flows at Gold Creek during initial reservoir filling.The greatest change to the system wi 11 occur duri ng the open-water season.Fill i ng phase of the Watana development wi 11 alter streamf1ows,water qual ity and water temperatures downstream from Watana Dam to Talkeetna (Chapter 2)• •Mainstem Habitats Mainstem habitats in this reach can be divided into two segments:from Watana Dam to RM 156.8 in Devi 1 Canyon and from RM 156.8 to Talkeetna (RM 99).High veloci- ties associated with natural flows through Devil canyon appear to prohibit upstream passage of fi sh beyond RM 156.8.Thus,anadromous fi sh are prevented from usi ng habitats upstream of the canyon.During the open-water season (June through October)mai nstem habitats below Devil Canyon are generally used as a migratory corridor by adu1 t and juveni 1e fi sh as they move to and from spawning and rearing areas that are located in other habitat types associated with the river.Only a few isolated salmon spawning areas have been identified in the mainstem (ADF&G 1981b).Few juvenile salmon are suspected to rear in this habitat type during most of the open-water season.Juvenile salmon and resident fish move into mai nstem habitats for overwi nteri ng as the river clears in late fall (ADF&G 1981d and 1981e). Several resident fish including burbot,whitefish and longnose sucker may occupy mainstem habitats year-round (ADF&G 1981e).Upstream of Devil Canyon,mai nstem habitats are used by burbot,scu1 pi n,longnose sucker and whitefish year-round and by Arctic grayling for overwintering habitat (ADF&G 1981f). A variety of changes may occur in mainstem habitats as a resu1 t of the proposed reservoir fi 11 i ng schedu1 e. Flows will be substantially reduced during the spring period.With the exception of the first year,average month 1y flows in May and June will be reduced to 6000 cfs from pre-project flows of 13,200 to 27,800 cfs, respectively (Table E.3.17).Decreases of this mag- nitude will 1 ike1y affect the physical processes in this reach,which may in turn affect fish associated wi th th is habi tat .type. £-3...71 r-, ...... Filling flows during May and June may affect the mechanical process and ice removal in this reach.Pre- sently,the natural flows increase during May,causing a mechanica T breakup of the ice cover,and rapi d1y transport large chunks of ice and sediment downstream. This force results from the rising stream flows from snowmelt and is common to many A1 askan rivers.Under the filling schedule,mechanical break-up may be restricted in mai nstem habitats and un1 ike1y to occur in side-channel or slough habitats.Thus ice scouring and bank gougi ng wou1 d be reduced.Ice jams and resultant overflows would be diminished (Chapter 2). Outmigration of salmon fry and smolts generally occurs in June,apparently on the receding limb of the spring high flows.Flows of 6000 cfs wou1 d probably not affect downstream mi grati ons in mai nstem habitats as sufficient depth and velocities would exist to trans- port fry or smolts.Depths and velocities predicted by the water surface profi Ie model at several transects selected for navigation studies indicate that at 6000 cfs,depths wou1 d be approximately 2 ft.Access to mainstem channels from slough and side-channel habitats may be adversely affected.This will be addressed in those sections. Flows of 6000 cfs would persist until the last week of July.Chinook salmon are passing through the system during this time to spawning habitats in tributary streams.These fi sh hold in rna i nstem areas to mature before moving into the tributaries (ADF&G 1981b).A cursory examination of the river 'indicates that many of the holding areas available at flows of 20,000 cfs would probably not be available at 6000 cfs •.Other suitable holding areas are expected to exist under the 1 ow-flow conditions resu1 ti ng from the reservoir filling.If adult fish prematurely move into the tributaries due to lack of mainstem holding areas,they may be subjected to increased predation and angling pressure. Under the proposed fill i ng schedu1 e,Devil Canyon may not block all upstream fi sh passage.Chi nook sal mon wou1 d 1 ike1y be ab1 e to pass through the canyon and utilize spawning habitat available in tributaries up- stream of Devil Canyon and below Watana Dam.In 1982, chi nook salmon spawned in the rna i nstem at the mouth of Cheechako Creek (RM 152.5)and in an unnamed Creek (Ch i nook Creek RM 156.8),both above the Devil Canyon dam site.High velocities blocked migrations past RM 156.8 (Trent 1982).According to 1982 USGS provisional E-3-72 streamflow data,flow levels dropped to 17,000 cfs at Gold Creek in early July,then rose to 25,000 for the remainder of the month.Since the telemetry studies placed chinook salmon in Devil Canyon in late June,the salmon probably passed through the canyon in early July.High flows in 1981 prevented them from migrating past RM 151.7 (ADF&G 1981b).Under the proposed fill- i ng schedul e,a·flow of 6000 cfs woul d be present in the canyon through late July.The entire canyon is expected to be passable by chinook salmon,allowing them to enter Tsusena and Fog Creeks (RM 178.9 and 173.9). Pink,chum and coho salmon spawning areas in the main- stem may be adversely affected by the filling schedule. These spawning areas are generally small,isolated areas on the river margins or behind velocity barriers. Lateral areas are more susceptible to changes in flow. The quality of these habitats may be degraded through reduced depth and velocity,some areas may be complete- ly dewatered.. Fall flows drop rapi dly under the fill i ng schedul e (Figure E.2.19).Spawning areas of fall spawning fish, such as Bering cisco,and other whitefish,could be adversely affected by receding flows.In addition, salmon spawning areas may be dewatered.Generally,the 1atera 1 areas are somewhat buffered.The ri ver deve l- ops an ice cover and increases in stage before the flow drops to its lowest level.Under the filling flows, the ri ver woul d reach 2000 cfs in October,whereas flows of 2000 cfs do not normally occur until November. Thus,the stage during filling in October would be reduced,decreasing the wetted perimeter. Since the diversion tunnels will function as a single, low-level outlet for downstream releases,the thermal regime of the Susitna River from Talkeetna to Watana Dam wi 11 be altered (Chapter 2).Water temperatures during the first open-water period of reservoir filling (May through October)will be similar to pre-project temperatures as the inflow has water temperatures of 9 to 4 degrees Celcius.Thus,the entire reservoir will be near 9°to 10°C (Chap;ter 2).Si nce the reservoir acts as a heat si nk,wi nter temperatures above Devi 1 Canyon may range from 2 to 4°C.When the \'ofater reaches RM 160,water temperatures are expected to near O°C (pre-project levels).Temperatures during the second open-water season may be sUbstantially reduced.Water released at Watana Dam is expected to be 4°C.Due to the large.volume (12,000 cfs)and the high water ve 1ocit i es (3-4 fps),water temperatures are expected to be in the range of 5°to 6°C at Talkeetna.Duri ng E-3-73 ..... """ ,..., - .... ~- - ~- i I During the third year of filling,reservoir water surface elevations are expected to be high enough to utilize the multiple level outlet structure.This should provide sufficient control to release water near 10°C during July,August,and early September. Lower water temperatures duri ng the second open-water season may adversely affect fish populations in the reach from Ta lkeetna to Watana Dam.Projected water temperatures of 5°_6°C are well bel ow normal water tempertures of 10°to 12°C in August.Low water temperatures may deter adult salmon from entering the reach above Talkeetna.Pi nk and Coho salmon may be especially sensitive to low water temperatures as these species are usually found in warmer areas.Chum salmon may tolerate lower water temperatures as they reported- ly spawn in water temperatures near 6°C (AEIOC unpub- 1 ished data 1980,ADF&G unpubl ished water temperature data 1982),however,low water temperatures in mainstem hol ding areas may del ay spawni ng.Temperatures in the range of 4°to 6°C retained seasonal maturity of gonads and delay spawning activity in salmon (Reingold 1968). Lower water temperatures duri ng the open-water season are expected to adversely affect resident and juvenile anadromous fish that utilize mainstem and side-channel habitat.Water temperature is closely correlated with feeding activity and growth (Clarke,Shelbourn,and Brett,1982).Colder water temperatures may reduce growth duri ng the open-water season.Fi sh may avoi d mainstem and side-channel habitats and move to warmer water in turbidity and slough habitat.Juvenile salmon were found to avoid cooler water when possible (Bustard and Narver 1975)• •Side-Channel Habitats Many of the physical changes identified for mainstem habitats would also occur in side-channel habitats. Since the side channels are generally characterized by higher streambed elevations,the forecasted changes in streamflow may cause greater effects ins i de-channe 1 habitats.Ouri ng the open-water season,si de-channel habitats are used for passage by salmon and rainbow trout,for spawni ng by pi nk,chum and coho salmon and for summer feeding areas by longnose sucker,burbot and whitefish (ADF&G 1981b,1981d and 1981e).Little juvenile salmon rearing has been reported in side- channel habitats duri ng the open-water season (ADF&G 1981e)• E-3-74 As in mai nstem habi tats,the greatest changes woul d probably occur in the spring (Table E.3.17).Many side channels that normally convey water in May,June and the first three weeks of July,would likely be dewater- ed under fill i ng flows,which represent a decrease in average monthly flows of approximately 70 and 40 per- cent,respectively for June and July. In other side-channels,flow may be reduced to an extent that the outmigration of salmon fry would be delayed.Higher spawning flows may allow fish to spawn in areas that are essentially cut off from the mainstem river.Thus,fry may be delayed until higher flows are released in late July.Few side-.channels that are wetted at 12,000 cfs are expected to be cut off at 6,000 cfs. Filling flows would alter the hydraulic conditions of the side channels as lower discharges would decrease velocities and depths.This may improve the quality of these areas as reari ng habitat for some resi dent and juvenile anadromous fish.Juvenile fish are generally found in association with low velocities (ADF&G 1982, Wilson et al.1981 and Environaid 1982).Burbot, longnose sucker and whitefish are also found in waters with a low velocity but require greater depth. Use of these areas by juvenile salmon may be presently 1 i mi ted by 1ack of a food source.Under fi 11 i ng flows suspended sedi ment woul d be decreased all owi ng greater light penetration;the scouring effect of the suspend- ed solids presently carried by the river would also be reduced (Chapter 2). Some side channels above Talkeetna would be completely dewatered under the proposed filling flows thus elimi- nating any rearing or feeding habitat normally support- ed by pre-project flow levels.Benthic production from these areas would also be lost. Reduced flows in the spring may inhibit emergence and outmigration in some side-channel spawning areas.At times,spawni ng areas can be substanti ally dewatered but the embryos can be maintained by intergravel flow that allows development to proceed.Normally,increas- ed spring streamflow in these areas provides water for emergence and outmigration.Filling flows may not be sufficient to provide streamflow in some of these· areas. E-3-75 .... - ..... - r - Forecasted August and September flows under the filling schedule may adversely affect spawning habitat in side- channels.Reductions in average monthy streamflows of 46 and 30 percent respectively may dewater some spawn- °ing areas currently used by salmon (Table E.3.17). Decreased mainstem flows would likely result in de- creased depths and vel ociti es inside-channel habitats which maya lter the avail abi 1 i ty of spawni ng habitat. Iti s unlikely that new spawning areas would become available under the filling flows.Side-channel habi- tats with a stream bed e 1ev at i on 1ow enough to convey water under the forecasted flows waul d probably not have substrate of a suitable size for spawning.Under natural conditions these side channels are subject to peak flows that have removed most of the gravel sub- strates,1eavi ng the stream bed armoured with 1arge cobbles and boulders (R &M Consultants 1982c).It is unlikely that the substrate in these areas would change as a result of the project (Chapter 2).Thus,the use of these areas by spawning fish would continue to be limited by substrate.The lateral areas where suitable substrates may exist would l"ikely be dewatered. Stream temperatures during filling in side-channel habitats will be similar to mainstem habitats (see previous section)• •Slough Habitats Slough habitats in the Talkeetna to Watana Dam reach have been identified as the most important spawni ng areas directly influenced by the Susitna River.Sock- eye,chum,pink and coho salmon have spawned in 16 of the 33 sloughs found above the confl uence with the Chul itna Ri ver.Juvenil e coho,chi nook,sockeye and chum salmon have been found utilizing these areas for reari ng habitat and overwi nteri ng sites (ADF&G 1981d). Rai nbow trout,burbot,longnose sucker and whitefish have been found in these habitats at various times of the year (ADF&G 1981e). Sloughs in this reach of the river resemble perched side-channels.In general,they function as overflow channels at high flows and convey turbid water from the mainstem.During low flow,clear water originates ·from surface runoff and groundwater upwelling and flows through the slough channel into the mai nstem river. (Refer to Section 2.2 (b)(iii)). E-3-76 The proposed reductions in mainstem flow during reser- voir filling would likely affect slough habitats. Ground water upwelling in the sloughs is probably dri- ven by the stage of the mai nstem Susitna Ri ver.A reduction in mainstem flow may result in decreased flow in the sloughs (Chapter 2).This could affect the quality and quantity of both spawning and rearing habi- tat presently available in the system. Filling flows may cause passage problems for adult salmon moving from mainstem and side-channel habitats into slough habitats.With mainstem flows above 14,000 cfs,a backwater forms at the mouth of the slough. Thi s increases water depths at,and upstream of,the slough mouth.Based on field observations during the low flows of August 1982,streamf10ws in the range of 12,000 to 14,000 cfs,combined with low surface run off,appeared to hamper or restr i ct the passage of adu 1t sa 1mon into severa 1 sloughs.The stage of the mai nstem at flows of approximately 12,000 cfs di d not create backwater effects at the mouths of some sloughs great enough to allow free passage by adult salmon. Reduced surface water i nf1 ow restri cted adult passage to spawning areas that were used in 1981.Under post- project conditi ons,only the backwater areas would be affected.Surface runoff,which is controlled by rainfall and snow melt,will contribute to flow in the sloughs and control the physical characteri stics of the habitat upstream of the backwater during the open-water season. Preliminary estimates indicate that flows of 16,000 to 18,000 cfs at Gold Creek may be required to insure easy passage of adults into slough habitats.Fi sh moved rapidly into sloughs during late August 1982 when the surface water runoff increased slough flows and mainstem flows rose from 12,000 to 18,000 cfs (Trihey 1982c). A reduction in mainstem stage may degrade or eliminate some spawning habitat in the sloughs.Adult sockeye and chum appear to seek out areas with upwelling groundwater to spawn.If a reduct ion in mai nstem discharge reduces the amount of upwell i ng or the area influenced by upwelling,spawning habitat may be .reduced or eliminated.Often,the backwater at the mouth of the slough increases water depth in the lower portion of the spawning area.A decrease in stage may prevent the use of these areas.Reduced water depth cou1 d al so increase the effectiveness of fi sh preda- tors. E-3-77 - i" - Since juvenile fish occupy habitats with a relatively wide range of depth,decreases in the depth of sloughs may have little effect on the utility of rearing habitat.The greatest impact to juvenil e habitat waul d occur if the reduct i on in depth also eli mi nates or reduces the util ity of cover objects associ ated with slough habitats.In add it i on to obj ect cover,you ng chi nook have been observed occupyi ng the interface between the turbid and clear water portions of the backwater at the mouth of the slough.Under the proposed flow regime during reservoir filling the amount of this particular habitat would be reduced by decrease,d backwater effects and lower turbidities. Additional rearing habitat may become availab1 e in mainstem and si de-channelhabi tats.(These habitats are discussed in their respective sections.) The reduction of mainstem flows during the spring and the altered breakup process may affect outmigration from slough habitats.There is some speculation that changes in water 1evel s and temperatures may tri gger outmigration in young salmon.Fish were observed to outmi grate on the recedi ng edge of the hi gh flows in spring 1982.Under the filling schedule,the high flows duri ng the spri ng would be e1 imi nated.Flow from local runoff would be unaffected.This flow and rising water temperatures may stimulate fry to out-migrate (Thomas 1975). Under filling flows and increased beaver activity may have an adverse affect on slough habitats.The el imi- nation of spring break-up flows will allow beaver to become established in most sloughs.During the low flows of August 1982,beaver dams located in slough 8A, 9B,and 19 have inhibited use of upstream habitats by adult salmon. E-3-78 •Tributary Habitats Compared with other habitat types in the reach from Talkeetna to Watana Dam,tributary habitats receive the 1ar gest sa 1mon esca pement (ADF &G 1981 b)•They also provide important spawning habitat for grayling and rainbow trout and rearing habitat for chinook and coho salmon juveniles (ADF&G 1981d and 1981e). With the exception of tributary mouths,tributary habi- tats below the impoundment will not be affected by the proposed project.Seasonal alterations of the mainstem discharge may alter the hydraulic conditions associated with the tributary mouths.During the open-water sea- s on,the present stage in the rna i nstem ri ver causes a backwater to form at the tr i butary conf1 uences.The backwater area provides rearing habitat for resident species and juvenile salmon (ADF&G 1981d and 1981e)and facilitates passage of upstream migrants. Lower mainstem flows during filling will reduce the backwater effects and decrease water depths at tri bu- tary mouths.Reari ng fi sh are not expected to be impacted as similar backwater areas will probably form in mai nstem habitats just downstream from tributary mouths.Rearing habitat presently located in tributary mouths will shift slightly downstream in location. A reduction in the stage of the mainstem river could potentially affect passage of adult fish if the tribu- taries become perched.As the tributary enters the mainstem river,the change in gradient causes the trib- utary water to drop transported materials.These gravel s and sand form small del tas at the mouths of tributaries (Figure E.2.79).As the stage in the mainstem recedes,the tributaries become perched above the river.However.since the flow in the tributary is not regulated,the tributary would continue to experi- ence peak high flows.which may be sufficient to down cut through the delta material to establish a channel at a new gradient.Most tributaries that support fish wi 11 not become perched but wi 11 cut a new channel through their deltas (R&M 1982f).Some creeks may become perched under the proposed filling schedule, which might impede migration by adult salmon and res i dents to upstream spawni ng areas.Of the streams that may become perched under the proposed filling flow.Jack Long (RM 144.8),Sherman (RM 130.9)and Deadhorse (121.0)creeks are the only streams used by a du 1t sal mo n. E-3-79 .... ~- - - - ""'"I - The reduced f1 ows through Devil Canyon may all ow chi nook salmon access to tr i butar i es upstream from the rapids that have historically blocked salmon migrations (see mainstem section).Under a filling regime of 6,000 cfs in June and 12,000 cfs in late July,chinook salmon would 1 ike1y have access to Cheechako Creek (RM 152.5)and the unnamed tributary (Chinook Creek)at RM 156.8 on an annual basis.In addition they may have access to Tsusena and Fog Creeks at RM 178.9 and 173.9 respectively.There appears to be adequate habitat in these creeks to allow for salmon production.Thus,the Watana Development may increase the amount of spawning habitat available in tributary habitats in this reach. Future development of the Devi 1 Canyon Dam woul d, however,eliminate access to these tributaries. -Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Reach Project effects below Talkeetna are expected to be cons i derab 1y reduced in magnitude from those presented for the Talkeetna toWatana Dam reach.Just upstream of Talkeetna,the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers join the Susitna Ri ver.These rivers contribute 40 and 20 percent,respectively,of the stream flow in this reach (R&M Consultants 1981c).Many other major tributaries entertheSusitna in this reach (Chapter 2).In order to apport i on the streamf10ws two streamflow stati ons were established in this reach;Sunshine and Susitna stations. Tables E.3.18 and E.3.19.present a comparison of pre- project and proposed filling flow regimes for these stations. Since the project would have no effect on the tributary basins,project-related physical changes in the Susitna River below Talkeetna will be of less magnitude than physical changes above Talkeetna.Impacts to fish habitats below Talkeetna are expected to be limited since only minor changes will occur in physical characteristics of mainstem habitats.Physical characteristics of sidechanne1s are generally more susceptible to changes in mainstem discharge and the proposed filling flows may affect side-channel habitats.Slough habitats below Talkeetna appear to be less influenced by mainstem streamf10ws than those above Talkeetna • •Mainstem Habitats During the open-water season mainstem habitats in this reach of the Susitna Ri ver are used primarily for pas- sage and spawni ng.A 1 imited number of spawni ng areas for chum salmon,Beri ng ci seo and eu1 achon have been located (Trent 1982;ADF&G 1982b).Few rearing fish E-3-80 have been found in this reach,but only limited inves- tigations have been conducted in its lower portion (ADF&G 1981d).Resident fish including burbot,white- fish,and 10ngnose sucker may occupy mainstem habitats during the open-water season (ADF&G 1981e). Little change is expected in water temperature or tur- bi dity in thi s reach.The Chu1 itna Ri ver carri es a much heavi er sediment load and has approxi mate 1y the same discharge as the pre-project Susitna River at their conf1 uence (R&M Consultants 1981d).Under the proposed filling schedule,the water from the Susitna Ri ver wou1 d compri se approximately 14 percent of the streamflow below the conf1 uence of the Chu1 i tna and Talkeetna rivers in July and 25 percent in August.The i nff1 uence of the Chu1 itna and Talkeetna ri vers wou1 d probab 1y domi nate the thermal,water chemi stry,and suspended sediment characteristics of the Susitna River below their confluence (Chapter 2). Only a small reduction in the number and magnitude of peak flows in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach is anticipated.Since the project controls such a small portion of the runoff in this reach,a 1 in 2 year flow event at Susitna Station would become a 1 in 5 or 1 in 10 year event (R&M Consultants 1982).Thus,high flows may still inhibit fish passage at times as well as limit benthic production. Under the proposed fi 11 i ng schedul e,average monthly streamflow in July and August woul d be reduced by 27 and 17 percent at Sunshine Station (Table E.3.18).Due to the channel geometry of the mai nstem,flow reduct- ions of thi s magnitude wou1 d probably not change the utilization of mainstem habitats with regard to salmon passage and resident fish summering activities.The reduct ions in depth result i ng from thi s decrease in streamflow woul d probably not create passage probl ems. Nor is it likely that summer feeding areas would be eliminated.Flow reductions may have a more signifi- cant effect on spawning habitat since this habitat tends to be located on the lateral margins of the mai nstem. Most salmon spawning areas in the mainstem are located in broad or braided segments that are more sensitive to changes in flow.Small changes in stage near the threshold value necessary to open the upper end of the braided channel can potentially result in large changes in the availability of spawning areas within the braid. E-3-81 - """ - ..... - ~I .- - - ...... Salmon and Bering cisco spawning habitats may be subject to greater changes si nce they occur primari 1y in the upper portion of this segment from RM 75 to 79 (ADF&G 1982).Eu 1achon spawni ngareaswou1 d be subject to the 1east amount of change since they occur in the lower part of the reach,RM 4.5 to 48 (Trent 1982). Project effects here are further muted by tributary inflow from Kroto Creek,Yentna River and several large tributaries. Bering cisco spawned in mainstem habitats from RM 75 to RM 79 during October 1981 (ADF&G 1982a).During fil- ling,October flows wou1 d be reduced by 9 percent the 2nd year and by 27 percent the th ird year at Sunshi ne Station,(Table E.e.18).Reductions less than 10 percent are not expected to impact fish as changes in depth and velocity are small.Reduction of 27 percent may affect Bering cisco spawning habitat presently. In the Susitna River,eulachon mainly spawn below the Yentna River in mainstem habitats (Trent 1982). Eu1achon spawning areas were tentatively identified by ADF&G during spawning surveys in May 1982 in relatively shallow water along the margins of the river,along islands and in backwaters at the mouths of side channel s.Because of the channel geometry in broad braided floodplain of this reach,similar habitats would probably exist in this portion of the river under the proposed filling schedule.This river segment is bu.ffered by inflow from several major tributaries. Reductions in long term average mont1y streamf10ws of 12 percent (from 60,500 to 53,100 cfs)are predicted at Susitna station during May (Table E.3.19).Even if some of the habitat presently util i zed is dewatered, habitat that would be available along the margins under the filling flows may provide replacement habitat. Winter streamflow reductions are not expected to affect habitat utilization in the mainstem below Talkeetna. Low wi nter flows can stress overwi nteri ng fi sh and embryos and are often a limiting factor for fish popu- lations in Alaska.The most critical time for fish occurs when flows are lowest.In the Susitna Riv'er flow generally reaches its lowest level in March • Reductions of 4 and 2 percent are projected at Sunshine and Susitna stations,respectively.Changes in flow of this magni tude wou1 d not change ~'Iater depth under ice or wetted permeter (Chapter 2).Therefore,overwi nter- i ng success of fi sh or devel opi ng embryos in mai nstem habitats are not expected to differ from existing conditions. E-3-82 Spring break-up flows would be decreased during fill- ing.Average monthly flows in May and June would be reduced by 26 percent at Sunshi ne Stat i on and by 12 percent at Susitna Station.This reduction is not anticipated to adversely affect the passage of out- migrating salmon smolts in mainstem habitats;neither is it expected to affect the spawning migration of rainbow trout or grayling as they move to the tribu- taries. •Side-Channel Habitats Many of the effects i dent ified for the rnai nstem under the proposed filling schedule would also probably per- tain to side-channel habitats.Mainstem flow generally controls the characteristics of side-channel habitats. However,changes in stream discharge can result in greater effects on side-channel habitats than on main- stem habitats.As in mainstem areas,water temperature and turbidity are expected to be similar to existing conditions below Talkeetna. During the open-water season side-channel habitats are used for passage by adult and juvenile salmon and resi- dent fish;for spawning by chum salmon;and for summer feeding areas by longnose sucker,burbot and whitefish. Only limited rearing of juvenile salmon has been re- ported in this habitat type during the open-water sea- son. Reductions in streamflow during August may dewater some salmon spawning habitat in side channels.Salmon spawning activity in this habitat type is generally located in side channels with relatively high streambed elevations.These areas are protected from the high scouring flows and are able to retain substrates suit- ably sized for spawning.The high streambed elevation also makes them susceptible to dewatering under reduced ma i nstem di scharge.The lower streamflows proposed during August may reduce the availability of spawning habitat in these areas. It is unlikely that lower flows during reservoir fil- ling will create new spawning areas in side channels that do not presently support spawni ng activity.Even though suitabl e hydraul i c conditions will occur,the presence of large substrate particles would probably limit their utility to fish.Side channels with suit- able hydraulic conditions under the proposed filling flows will also have fairly low streambed elevations. Because of the low streambed elevations,they will still be subject to high scouring flows and will be armoured with large cobbles. E-3-83 - - ~I .... - - .~ ~. - Studies are planned to investigate the relative incuba- t ion success in side-channe 1 habitats and to quantify the changes in the availability of side-channel habitat to determi ne the effect on salmon product ion. The proposed fi 11 i ngf1 ow regime may affect rearing habitat in side channels below Talkeetna.Side chan- nels have a gradation of streambed elevations from high overflow channel s to deep channels.The effect of reduced streamf10ws on reari ng habitat will depend on the streambed elevation of the side channel.Some reari ng habi tat for juvenil e anadromous and res i dent fish may be lost if side channels dewateror water depths become too shallow.Generally,reduced flows increase the available rearing area as young fish pre- fer low velocities (ADF&G 1982a,Wil son et a1.1980, and Environai d 1982).New reari ng areas may become available in other side channels where the flow reduct- ions decrease velocities but maintain sufficient depth. ThUS,the potential exists for the location of the rearing habitat to change,but the availability of rearing habitat to be similar to pre-project levels. Rearing habitat and summer feeding areas may be limited by the avail abil ity of food in si de-channe 1 habitats. Suspended sediment load and peak flows may cause low benthic production in the Susitna River.Since little change is expected in these parameters below Talkeetna (R&M Consultants 1981,1982c),the change in hydraulic characteristics may not be sufficient to increase utilization of these habitats by anadromous juvenile and resident fish • •Slough Habitats Few sloughs below the confluence of the Chulitna River have been extensively sampled.Slough habitats in this reach have been i dentifi ed as spawni ng and reari ng areas (ADF&G 1981b,1981d,1981c).Many of these areas are influenced by tributary streams and,to a lesser degree,by the mainstem system.Chum,pink and sockeye salmon spawn in slough habitats below the Chulitna con- fluence.Juvenile coho and chinook salmon have been found using these areas for rearing and overwintering; (ADF&G 1981d).Rainbow trout,bur bot ,longnose sucker, and whitefish use these habitats seasonally (ADF&G 1981e)• Sloughs in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Reach may be affected in generally the same way as sloughs above Talkeetna.The magnitude of predicted change in main- stem flow is less in this reach,therefore the magni- tude of changes to slough habitats and the resu1 tant impacts to fishery resources is expected to be smaller. E-3-84 •Tributary Habitats For the most part,tributary habitats in the Cook Inlet to Talkeetna reach of the Susitna River are not expect- ed to be affected by the project.The project would not alter any of the existing physical processes in the tri butari es with the excepti on of the area near tri bu- tary mouths.The rnai nstem creates a backwater at the mouths of the tributaries which provides habitat for reari ng juveni 1es and resi dent fi sh (ADF&G 1981d,e). The stage in the mainstem controls the extent of these backwater areas.Flow reduct ions under the proposed filling schedule may alter the physical characteristics of the tri butary mouths in the upper port i on of thi s reach.Ouri n9 the open-water season,mai nstem di s- charge woul d be reduced by 12 to 34 percent at Sunshi ne Station (Table E.e.18).Reductions in flow in June (34 percent)and July (28 percent)may reduce the areal extent of these backwaters.Depth would decrease and velocity would increase as the stage of the mainstem drops. Tributaries that enter the mainstem Susitna River in the lower portion of this reach would probably be minimally affected since the percent change in dischare would be relatively small.Flow reductions ranging from 13 to 8 percent are anticipated in June through August at Susitna Station (Table E.3.19).Tributaries are not expected to become perched because of these reductions in mainstem discharge. During the winter,tributary mouths provide important overwintering habitat and may provide spawning habitat for burbot.Because of the small reduction in mainstem discharge,winter conditions are expected to remain similar to pre-project conditions. -Estuary Since only minor increases in salinity are anticipated duri ng reservoir fi 11 i ng,impacts to fishery resources are not expected. (iii)Operation of Watana Dam -Reservoir Habitats Watana Reservoir will have an area of approximately 59 sq.mi.with depths up to 735 ft.The reservoir will ex- perience an annual drawdown of 105 ft (Maximum drawdown is 120 ft).The reservoir will reach its lowest level in mid May (2080 ft)and full pool by early September. E-3-85 - - -- ...... ..... ,~ - Water quality conditions expected in the reservoir are discussed in Chapter 2 and are not expected to preclude seasonal fish utilization of the reservoir. Habitat potential of the reservoir is considered to be limited due to low productivity.The reservoir will be oligotrophic due to summer turbidity levels of 30-50 NTU and the 105 ft drawdown will inhibit development of a litteral zone.Thus,food availability may limit fish populations in the reservoir. As discussed under reservoir filling (Section 2.3 (a) (ii)),limited populations of burbot,lake trout,and whitefish may util ize the reservoir year-round.Repro- duction of reservoir fish is expected to be limited due to the drop in water surface elevation during reservoir operation in winter.In Alaska and British Columbia, 1ake trout spawn in depths from 3 ft to 110 ft (Morrow 1980).Drawdown during the probable incubation period for 1ake trout is 70 ft.Burbot probably spawn in December and may take 60 days to hatch (Morrow 1980). Drawdown during December and January is expected to be 40 ft. Grayl i ng and longnose sucker are expected to use the reservoir for overwintering (as discussed in Section 2.3 (a)(ii),Filling Watana Reservoir).Water level fluc- tuations in the reservoir are expected to adversely affect the spawning activities of these species.Both grayl i ng and longnose sucker spawn in tri butary habitats during late spring (IVlorrow 1980).The reservoir will be rapidly filling at that time of the year (1 ft per day). Even though these fish have a relatively short incubation period (2 to 3 weeks),spawning areas will be inundated before the eggs hatch.Table E.3.20 shows the 1ength of tributaries inundated during late May and June.Rising water 1eve1s wi 11 cause sed i ment depos it ion in spawni ng areas resulting in mortalities to developing embryos. (This is discussed in Section 2.3 (a),(ii),Filling Watana Reservoir).The incubation success of fish spawning in tributary habitats above 2135 ft in elevation would not be effected. As presented inSect ion 2.3 (a)(i i),reservoi r habitats are expected to provide overwinteri ng habitat for grayl ing,lake trout,burbot,whitefish,longnose sucker and Dolly Varden. E-3-86 -Talkeetna to Watana Dam •Mainstem Habitats Mainstem habitats in this reach can be divided into two segments:those above Devil Canyon and those below Devil Canyon.Water velocity in Devil Canyon presently prohi bits the upstream passage of fi sh,thus,anadrom- ous fish and rainbow trout are prevented from utilizing habitats upstream of the canyon. Post-project strearnflows in the rnai nstem duri ng the open-water season woul d be sUbstantially reduced from pre-project conditions.Table E.3.24 presents a com- parison of pre-and post-project stream flows for Gold Creek station.Reductions in average monthly flows from 40 to 62 percent are predicted in June through August (Chapter 2).Because of the rectangular channel configuration of existing mainstem areas,reductions of thi s magni tude woul d probably not adversely affect their utilization.In fact,decreased stream flows may slightly improve the utility of mainstem habitats for both anadromous and resident fish.Use of these areas may presently be limited in part by high velocities. Streamflows during project operation are not expected to adversely affect the upstream passage of mi grat i ng fi sh in the mai nstem.Average monthly flows in July are projected to be 9,200 cfs,a decrease of 62 percent from pre-project condi t ions.Although water depths would be decreased in many mainstem habitats,suffi- cient depth would still be available for fish passage. Operat i ng flows are hi gher than fill i ng flows from May through July and are expected to provide greater depths than filling flows. As in filling flow conditions,velocities in Devil Canyon may not block all upstream fish passage during project operation.Chinook salmon would 1 ikely be able to pass through the canyon and utilize spawning habitat available in tributaries upstream from Devil Canyon and below Watana Dam (Section 2.3 (a)(ii)). A significant reduction in the number and magnitude of flood events in this reach of the Susitna River would likely result from project operation (Chapter 2).This could have several beneficial effects on mainstem habi- tats.Presently,the Susitna River at Gold Creek carries peak flows of 75,000 to 80,000 cfs (10 yr frequency).These floods transport 1 arge amounts of sed i ment,scour the ri ver bed and remove most of the E-3-87 - - - .-. - - ~, - - - - suitable spawning gravel s.Reduction of these peak flows woul d reduce the habitat di srupt ions associ ated with high flows. There is some indication that high flows may,at times, limit fish passage.High stream flows that occurred in August 1981 appeared to inhibit upstream migration of adult salmon (ADF&G 1981b and 1982a).Migration re- sumed when flows receded.Operation of the project would decrease the magnitude of high flows and associa- ted velocities thus reducing disruptions in migra- tions. Small i sol ated spawni ng areas are presently avail abl e in the mainstem.Some of these areas,generally located on the river margins behind a velocity barrier, may be degraded or dewatered.The creation of new spawning habitat appears unlikely.Although adequate depth and velocities are likely to exist,the lack of suitable substrate would likely limit spawning in this type of habitat.The streambed of most mainstem channels is composed of large cobbles and boulders (R&M Consultants 1981c).Even though flood flows would probably no longer flush gravels from this reach,the recruitment of gravel to the ri ver may be 1i mited. Small,isolated deposits of gravel may occur downstream from tributary mouths and may provide some suitable spawning habitat. Sedi ment transport under post-project conditions woul d be markedly different from present conditi ons.The reservoir is expected to act as a settling basin,re- moving much of the suspended sediment load presently transported by the river.Nearly all sediments 1ess than 5 microns in size would be trapped by the reser- voir.A 1arge portion (20 to 25 percent)of the sediments carried by the river is glacial flour in the 2 micron diameter range (R&M Consultants 1982c).These woul d pass through the dam and be transported down- stream to Cook Inlet. The sediment load of the outflow water would be re- duced by 75 to 80 percent from that of pre-project con- ditions (Chapter 2).The relatively clear water may pick up silts and sand downstream of the dam and trans- port them down river.Over time,this would result in the removal of fine sediments from the streambed.How- ever,much of the riverbed above Talkeetna is presently armoured with large gravels and cobbles.Silts may be removed only from the surface of the streambed (Chapter 2)• E-3-88 Reduction in the number of high flows should also reduce the frequency of streambed scour in mai nstem habitats.At present,high flows may be limiting benthic production in the mainstem as frequent bed movement may preclude the development of a stab 1e environment.Decreased sediment load would also be expected to improve benthic production as siltation of interstitial spaces would be reduced. Rearing habitat in the mainstem may be slightly in- creased under post-project conditions.Reduced veloci- ties and turbidity would probably benefit young fish and resident adults.Areas providing suitable habitat would likely still be limited to river margins or other 1ow-ve 1ocity areas created by obstructions in the chan- nel.Increased benthic production would also enhance rearing habitats by providing increased availability of prey items.Some fish presently use the turbidity as cover.Increased cl arity may resul tin greater preda- tion on small fish.Resident fish would probably also be more susceptible to sport fishing. Duri ng the wi nter (November through Apri 1),mai nstem habitats are used by reari ng salmon and res i dent fi sh including rainbow trout,burbot whitefish and longnose sucker.Fi sh move out of the tri butaries to mai nstem habitats where most overwi nteri ng occurs (ADF&G 1981d, 1981e).Average monthly stream flows for the Susitna during this period would increase as a result of dam operations,i.e.,from 1800 cfs to 10,700 cfs at Gold Creek in December,(Table E.3.20).Increases of this magnitude woul d 1ikely alter the character of wi nter habitats. Winter thermal characteristics of the reservoir deter- mine the outflow temperatures and directly influence downstream water temperatures.Increases have been postulated that would likely raise mainstem water temperatures above Devil Canyon from near 0 to 2-4°C. Stream temperatures such as these would preclude development of an ice cover in much of this reach el iminating the associated staging and backwater effects. Under post-project winter conditions the river in this reach may have hi gher vel ocit i es,1ess depth and 1ess wetted perimeter thah under pre-project conditi ons with an ice cover. E-3-89 - - - - - - ..... - - - Warmer water temperatures may benefi t overwi nteri ng fi sh by reduci ng mortal it i es associ ated wi th freezi ng. Stream temperature and discharge should remain fairly stable,preventing fish from becoming trapped in unfavorable areas that freeze solid.During the winter of 1981-1982 winter fish distribution appeared to coi nci de with warmer water temperatures.Bustard and Narver (1975)reported that juveni1 e coho move to warmer water for overwi nteri ng when warmer water is available.. Suspended sediments are projected to increase slightly over pre$ent wi nter condit ions.Part i c1 es greater than 5 microns would remain in suspension in the reservoir, increasing downstream turbidity levels (Chapter 2). This slight increase in turbidity is not expected to adverse 1y affect fi sh populati ons us i ng mai nstem habi- tats.Fish apparently successfully overwinter in habitats with similar levels of turbidity in the Kenai River,Alaska (Burger et a1.1982). In the portion of the river below Devil Canyon,in- creased winter flows would probably cause significant changes in winter habitat characteristics.Water temperature is expected to suffi ci ent 1y decrease to form an ice cover by RM 14,assuming outflow temperatures of 1 to 2°e.Under outflow temperatures of 4°C an ice cover would form by RM 130 (Chapter 2). Downstream of thi s,wi nter water temperatures are expected to di ffer 1ittl e from pre-project conditi ons. The effects of increased winter flows on backwater and stagi ng processes expected to occur under post-project flows may impacts on fish habitat.Wetted perimeter of the river and depth are expected to greatly increase in many mainstem habitats because of increased discharge. High velocities in several steep gradient sections may prevent the format i on of an ice cover in these areas. This may cause the formation of frazi1 ice,which would 1 ike1y augment backwater effects already increased in magnitude from increased flows.Thus,the stage of the river may be raised more than that expected from the incremental increase in flow.If the stage of the river is raised sufficiently,mainstem water may flood side channels and sloughs. I ncrease wi nter flows are not expected to adver se 1y affect overwintering habitat in mainstem habitats. Greater water depth and increased wetted peri meter is expected to provide more 1i vi ng space for juvenil e anadromous and resident fish. E-3-90 Increased winter temperatures and altered ice processes may affect fishery resources associated with mainstream habitats in the wi nter peri ad.If the increased sur- f ace water'temperatures cause an increase in i nter- gravel water temperatures,then incubating embryos will be affected.Incubation rates of fish embryos and benthi c invertebrates are closely tied to water tem- peratures.An increase in i ntergravel water tempera- tures would likely accelerate development and may result in early emergence.Early emergence has been re 1ated to decreased survi va 1 rates in both benthi c invertebrates and Pacific salmon (Bailey,Pella,and Taylor 1974).Pink salmon would be especially vulnerable to mortality related to early emergence as they tend to select areas directly influenced by surface water and tend to outmi grate shortly after emergence.Young fi sh may begi n to outmi grate before downstream conditions are suitable.Temperatures below the confluence of the Chul itna Ri ver are 1 ikely to be near O°C.Outmi grants encounteri ng these temperatures may experience thermal shock,which has been linked to increased mortal ity (Brett and Al derdice 1958,Brett 1952). Chum salmon would be less susceptible to changes in surface water temperatures as the adults tend to select areas influenced by upwelling groundwater,which is buffered from changes in mainstem surface water.In addition,salmon may rear for approximately a month before moving downstream.Early emergence may have 1 ittle affect on coho salmon as they remain in fresh- water habitats for two years and have been found to seek out warmer areas in the spri ng. u.s.Fish and Wildlife Service is conducting an incubation study to determine the effects of different water temperatures on embryo development rates for Susitna River chum salmon. E-3-91 ~I - - - ~- ..... """" No adverse impacts to water qual ity parameters are an- ticipated under post-project conditions.Gas super- saturat i on in outflow waters has caused si gni fi cant fish mortalities from gas bubble disease (Nebeker, Stevens,and Baker 1979;Stevens,Nebeker and Baker 1980).Water passing over a high spillway into a deep plunge pool dissolves air causing supersaturation.The degree to whfch thi s occurs depends on the depth of the plunge pool,height of the spillway and amount of water bei ng spi 11 ed.Supersaturated water is unstable and over time will return to normal levels if exposed to the ambi ent air pressure.However,travel ti me down- stream duri ng hi gh flow peri ods can be fairly short, causing supersaturation to extend considerable dis- tances downstream.The spillway design includes the installation of cone valves,which help prevent gas supersaturation from occurring for all floods with a return period of less than once in 50 years (Chapter 2)• •Side-Channel Habitats Many of the project-induced physical changes identified for mainstem habitats would also occur in side-channel habitats.Reductions from pre-project streamflow during the open-water season may dewater some spawning habitat presently used by salmon.However,spawning habitat under operat i ana 1 flows may be greater than that under filling flows. The lower post-project flows duri ng the spawni ng season may tend to concentrate spawners in areas that are 1ess likely to dewater under higher winter flows.Side channel s with lower strearnbed el evati ons are presently subject to high scouring flows and many do not have substrates suitabl e for spawni ng.Most are armored with large cobbles and boulders that are underlain with large gravel s embedded in si lt and sand. Operational flow may result in additional rearing areas becoming available in side-channel habitats during the open-water season.Lower di schargesgenerally result in decreased velocities and depths.This would likely improve the qual ity of these areas as rearing habitat for some resident and juvenile anadromous fish. Post-project water temperatures in the side-channel areas would be similar to mainstem water temperatures since mainstem water would be the controlling factor. However,temperatures of water in lateral margins of the side channels may be slightly warmer than mainstem water due to shallower depths and slower velocities. The projected decrease in turbi dity may result in more E-3-92 solar radiation being absorbed by the water.Increased water temperatures may enhance the qual i ty of reari ng habitat in side channels (Abbed 1980;Clarke,Shelbourn and Brett 1981).. Major impacts downstream of Watana dam expected to re- sult from project operations,are summarized in Figure Eo 3.20a. A decrease in turbidity would also likely have a bene- ficial effect on food production in side-channel habi- tats.More energy would be available for primary pro- duction thus increasing the food base for other trophic levels.The lower sediment load may also remove many of the si lts and sands presently occupyi ng the i nter- stitial spaces of the substrate.This may provide more habitat for benthic invertebrates. During the late fall and winter period mainstem dis- charges would be increased approximately 250 to 650 percent (Table E.3.24).The magnitude of the increase in flow expected to occur in side channel habitats is dependent on the stage in the mainstem and the stream- bed elevation of the side channels.Wetted perimeter, depth and velocities may increase in these habitats during the winter months.The seasonal variation in flow pattern would be substantially reduced under the post-project flow regime.Presently,the stage in the side channel drops in the fall as mainstem flows de- crease.As the river forms an ice cover,the stage in the side channel increases because of the backwater effects caused by ice formation.Under post-project conditions,the flow would not drop significantly below 8,000 cfs in the fall/winter period.Thus,some side channels would be less susceptible to dewatering and freezing under higher post-project winter flows than at present. Incubation success in side-channel areas may be improv- ed under post-project conditions as the eggs would not be as likely to dewater.Increased flows may also pro- vide greater intergravel flow,which would benefit incubating embryos and alevins.Post-project flows would also improve the quality of overwintering habitat for juvenile anadromous and resident fish in side chan- nel habitats.Greater water depths would provide more living space and would be less likely to freeze solid during the winter. E-3-93 _. ...... - - - - - •Slough Habitats During the open-water season,impacts to slough hab- itats above Talkeetna under operation of Watana Dam are not expected to differ from those resulting from fil- ling Watana Reservoir.Streamflows during late fall and winter will be increased,providing a higher stage in the mainstem.The increased stage may increase the rate and areal extent of groundwater upwelling in the sloughs.Incubation success of salmon embryos may be improved. Post-project winter conditions may affect incubation and overwintering in the sloughs.The increased flows in conjunction with increased water temperatures would change the ice processes in this reach of river.Pres- ently,as the mainstem forms an ice cover,the stage increases due to the backwater effects.Thus at wi nter discharges of approximately 1500 cfs,the stage in the river and the wetter perimeter resembles that of a dis- charge of approximately 23,000 cfs.Under postproj ect conditions the river may not form an ice cover above RM 130.Thus,the stage in the river and the wetted per- imeter of sloughs and side channels would probably be decreased relative to pre-project conditions during the winter months.If the decrease in wetted perimeter and water depth resu1 ts in dewatering or increased depth of freeze,eggs i ncubat i ng in the gra ve 1s coul d be ad- verselyaffected.Overwintering areas could also be adversely affected by the same physical processes which may cause increased mortalities for juvenile anadromous and resident fish. In sloughs near the edge and downstream of the ice cover,surface water temperatures coul d be affected. If the post-project mainstem flow enters the head ends of the sloughs,the addition of mainstem water would reduce the surface water temperatures of the sloughs and increase the format i on of ice.In some cases con- siderable glaciation could occur and the value of these areas for overwintering may be reduced. The ice could also remain and reduce surface water tem- peratures in the sloughs well into the spring.Since the mechanical break-up likely would not occur,these ice formations in the sloughs would have to melt out rather than being carried out by high flows.Ice may be present in the sloughs unt i1 1ate June.The pre- sence of ice would reduce the surface water tempera- t ures and may alter the qua 1i ty of these areas as ear 1y nursery areas for emerging fry. E-3-94 •Tributary Habitats Tributary habitats in the Talkeetna to Watana Dam reach would likely be affected sim1ar1y under both filling and operation during much of the open-water season. Augmented wi nter flows may increase the amount of over- wi nteri ng habitat associ ated with tri butary mouths.A higher discharge in the mainstem may increase the water depth and extent of backwaters at the tributary mouths. Studies indicate that tributary mouths may be important overwintering habitat (ADF&G 1981d,1981e). -Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Reach Project effects in this reach of river are expected to be consi derab1y reduced in magnitude from those presented for the Ta 1keetna to Watana Dam reach because of the influence of the Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers.Many of the changes i dent i fi ed under the fi 11 i ng schedu1 e (Section 2.3 (a)(ii))for the open-water season would persist under operation flows.Winter flows would be increased• •Mainstem Habitats During the open-water season,mainstem habitats will be similarly affected under filling of Watana Reservoir and operation of Watana Dam.Operational flows are slightly greater in the spring and fall (Tables E.3.25 and E.3.26). Bering cisco spawned in mainstem habitats during October 1981.Si nce 1itt 1e change in average monthly streamflow or in stream temperature is anticipated for October,these fish would probably not be adversely affected by the project. In the Susitna River,eulachon spawn mainly below the Yentna River in mainstem habitats.Eu1achon spa~'1ning areas tentatively identified during spawning surveys in May 1982 were located in relatively shallow water along the margins of the river,along islands and in back- waters at the mouths of side channels (Trent 1982). These habitats would probably exist in this portion of the river under post-project conditions.This segment would be subjected to the least amount of change since it is buffered by inflow from all major tributaries. Reduction in average monthly streamflow of 5 percent (from 60,500 to 57,600 cfs)are predicted at Susitna Station during the month of May (Table E.3.26). E-3-95 - ..., - - - .... During the winter increases in discharge from 2600-5000 cfs to 9,500-13,000 cfs are predicted at Sunshine Station (Table £.3.25).Water temperatures are not expected to differ from pre-project conditions. Increases in discharge may result in a slight increase in wetted perimeter. The availability of overwintering habitat may increase due to increased water depth and wetter perimeter. Since the flow would remain fairly constant,increased survival may result from reduction of mortal ity asso- ciated with freezing. Increased winter flows may also increase the survival of salmon embryos.Spawning areas presently dewatered or frozen duri ng low wi nter flows that occur under pre-project conditons may be improved.The increase in depth and wetted perimeter under post-project flows may prevent dessication or freezing of embryos and alevins in these areas • •Side-Channel Habitats As discussed under the reservoir filling flow regime, reductions in stream flow during the open-water season may dewater or degrade some spawni ng habi tat presently used by salmon,as well as affect rearing and summer feeding habitat for residents and anadromous juve- nil es. During the winter period streamflows in side-channel habitats would be increased.The increase in wetted peri meter resulting from greater winter di scharge has not been quantified,but the seasonal variation in flow through the si de channel s woul d be decreased under the post-project fl owregi me.Presently,the stage in the side channel drops in the fall as mainstem flows decrease.As the ri ver forms an ice cover,the stage in the side channel increases from the backwater effects caused by ice format ion in both the mai nstem and side channels,which raises the stage in the side channel.Post-project increases in wi nter di scharge will result in increased wetted perimeter • Increased winter discharge may have a beneficial effect on overwintering fish and incubating embryos.In- creased discharge may result in increased depths in side-channel areas.This would provide more living space and perhaps prevent freezei ng in these areas. I ncreased depths may prevent si de-channel habitats from bei ng dewatered thus protect i ng embryos from dessi ca- tion and freezing.Increased surface flow may also E-3-96 -------------~------~-- result in increased intergravel flow,which would also benefit embryo development and overwintering j uvenil es • •Slough Habitats Increases in winter streamflows may have a beneficial effect on slough habitats.The augmented discharge may increase the areal extent of the backwater at the slough mouth creat i ng greater water depth wi thi n the slough.The upstream extent of the backwater effect would depend on the gradient of the slough.Increased water depth may prevent a portion of the slough from freezing and increase the availability of overwintering habitat. Tributary Habitats Tributary mouths are expected to be affected similarly under both filling and operation of Watana Dam during the open water season.Duri ng the wi nter,tri butary mouths provide important overwi nteri ng habitat.The effects of higher discharge in the mainstem may in- crease the areal extent of the backwaters,and increase t he amount of overwi nteri ng habitat associ ated with tributary mouths. -Estuary HaM tats Since only minor changes in salinity are predicted under project operation (Chapter 2),no impacts to fish re- sources in estuary are anticipated. (b)Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Habitat Associated with Devil Canyon Impacts sustained by aquatic habitats as a result of construction and operation of Devil Canyon Dam will be similar to those occurr- ing under construction and operation of Watana Dam.This section addresses additional impacts and increased magnitude of impacts to aquatic habitats attributable to the development of Devil Canyon Dam assuming Watana Dam is in place. (i)Construction of Devil Canyon Dam and Related Facilities -Devi 1 Canyon Dam Devil Canyon Dam wi 11 be located at RM 152 of the Susitna Ri ver approximately 32 miles downstream from the Watana Dam site.A concrete arch dam will be built at the down- stream end of Devil Canyon and a fill saddle dam will be connected to the south end of the arch dam.The reser~ voir behind Devil Canyon will be about 26 miles long and not more than one half mile wide. E-3-97 - - - - ... ......, - The concrete dam and foundation will be approximately 650 feet hi gh and wi 11 have a span of 1200 feet at the dam crest.An estimated 2.7 million cubic yards of aggregate will be needed to construct the concrete arch dam.The saddle dam will be approximately 900 feet across and 275 feet high and will require about 1.2 million cubic yards of material. As with Watana,Devil Canyon Dam will have a powerhouse, inlet,outlet and emergency spillway.A 39-foot diameter tailrace tunnel will direct turbine discharge approxi- mately 1.5 miles downstream of the arch dam • During construction of the dam,the river will be blocked above and below the site by cofferdams.The flow will be diverted into a 3D-foot diameter tunnel 1490 feet long and discharged back into the river.The up-and down- stream cofferdams wi 11 be about 400 feet long and 200 to 400 feet wide. The adverse impacts upon aquat ic habitat at the Devi 1 Canyon Dam site are expected to be si mil ar to,but 1ess than,those at the Watana site. At the Devil Canyon Dam site,the Susitna River is con- fi ned to a canyon about 600 feet deep and 200 to 400 feet wide.The river bottom is primarily composed of cobbles, boulders,and blocks of rock;the water is extremely tur- bulent.It is surmised that few fish live in the area of the dam site (ADF&G 1981e).Chinook salmon migrated up- stream of Devil Canyon Dam site in 1982 and are expected to pass through the Canyon during the operation of Watana Dam • •Alternation of Waterbodies Impacts from Devi 1 Canyon Dam construct ion wi 11 be primarily restricted to the vicinity of the dam site. A 1000 foot section of the Susitna River between the cofferdams will be dewatered for several years dur i ng construction.Although that stretch of river may be inhabited by scu1pins and possibly other resident speci es,it is not expected that dewateri ng will have more than a minor impact upon availability of suitable habi tat.The dam foundat i on will cover about 90 feet of river bottom.This,too,is considered to be a minor impact. Construction of the arch dam and the saddle dam will require excavation in the river channel at the damsite. Excavation by blasting or by mechanical means may result in the introduction of materials into the E-3-98 Susitna River that may be carried downstream.The turbulence of the water at the site would preclude sedimentation in that stretch of river.Adverse impacts from i ntroduct i on of increased sed i ment are expected to be minor. The greatest impacts during construction of the dam are likely to be associated with gravel mining and process- ing in streams and floodplains.Gravel for filter materi a1 and for concrete aggregate wi 11 be removed from the Susitna Ri ver and from Cheechako Creek all u- vial areas upstream from the dam site.The effects of gravel mining on aquatic systems have been discussed under Section 2.3 (a)(i).Since the material removal sites wi 11 be inundated,impacts at the sites wi 11 be transitory. •Changes in Water Quality Potenti al impacts to water qual ity woul d be primarily caused by increased turbidity due to erosion,and through di scharge of effl uent from the concrete batching process.Turbidity increases in the Susitna River may be negligible.See Section 2.3 (a)(i)for discussion. •Disturbance of Fish Populations Instream activities during material extraction near Cheechako Creek could disrupt fish movements,spawning and rearing depending upon location,type and duration of the activities.It is unlikely that the dam site itself is located in a stretch of the Susitna regularly inhabited by fish,therefore it is not expected that the excavation and blasting required at that location would be disruptive to fish populations. -Devil Canyon Camp and Vi 11 age •Construction and Operation of Camp and Village During construction of Devil Canyon Dam,housing will be needed for 2300 persons (EXhibit A).Both a construct i on camp and a construction vi 11 age wi 11 be located about a mile to the southwest of the dam site. The camp will include bachelor dormitories,cafeteria, warehouses,offices,hospital,and recreational buildings.The village will contain housing for 170 famil i es and will i ncl ude a school,stores·and a recreat i on area. E-3-99 - - - - - 1I'Ill8:. - -- .- I - The camp will be approximately one half mile from the village.Both developments will be more than 700 feet above the Sus itna Ri ver and more than 4000 feet from the edge of the canyon.Water,sewage and solid waste disposal facilities will be shared by both developments.Water will be withdrawn from the Susitna River and effluent from a biological lagoon system discharged into the river below the water intake.The upper reaches of Jack Long Creek border the camp and the vi 11 age to the south,comi ng to withi n 200 feet of the camp.A small unnamed creek drains a series of lakes 3000 feet to the east of the camp and enters the Susitna at about RM 150.The creek is paralleled by the sewage outfall line for about 1000 feet or about 1/5 of its length. Both the camps and the vi 11 age are temporary develop- ments.Permanent personnel responsible for operation of Devil Canyon Dam will live at Watana Village • The unnamed creek and lakes may support grayling.Jack Long Creek contains pink salmon and chinook salmon in its lower reaches,and also lTIay support chum salmon and coho salmon.Portage Creek contains chinook salmon, coho salmon,rai nbow trout,round whitefi sh and humpback whitefish.Chinook salmon,grayling and Dolly Varden are found in the lower reaches of Cheechako Creek.Impacts as a result of camp/village operations are expected to be 1 imited to the area wi thi n a few miles of the dam site. Changes in Water Quality Erosi on into the Susitna Ri ver from gravel ml nl ng in Cheechako Creek is not expected to result in adverse impacts to fi she Because of its proximity to the developments,Jack Long Creek may recei ve run-off from the camps.Increased sed iment 1eve 1 s may adversely affect spawning habitats downstream. Water for camp use will be removed from the Susitna River and treated effluent and waste water will be returned to the river.It is anticipated that the treated effluent will be diluted 2000:1 by the Susitna and will therefore have no effect upon fish (Chapter 2).Storm drainage and oily water runoff from the construct i on camp may affect the upper portion of Jack Long Creek.The fuel storage area is located on the south side of the construc- t i on camp about 200 feet above Jack Long Cr eek.It is possible that accidental fuel spills could reach the creek if storage facilities failed.It is not E-3-100 expected that runoff from the solid waste disposal site and the construction village will adversely affect any water bodies since both are more than 1000 feet from Jack Long Creek • •Direct Construction Activity The camp and vil1 age at the Devil Canyon site wi 11 house 2300 workers for several years.It is expected that,as a result,streams and lakes in the vicinity may be subjected to increased fi shi ng pressure.Thi s area has not been heavily utilized for sport fishing in the past. The water bodies most likely to be affected include Cheechako Creek,unnamed creek and 1 akes,Jack Long Creek,and to a lesser extent,Portage Creek.With the excepti on of Portage Creek,these water bodies are within a short distance from the camp/village and the dam site.Portage Creek enters the Sus itna Ri ver from the north about 2.5 miles downstream from the dam 10ca- t ion. (ii)Filling Devil Canyon Reservoir -Inundation of Upstream Habitats Filling Devil Canyon Reservoir would inundate approximately 26 miles of Susitna River mainstem habitat and 11 miles of tributary habitats over a 5 month period. These habitats would be converted from lotic to 1entic systems with accompanying changes in hydraulic character- istics,substrate,turbidity,temperature and nutrient levels.These changes may result in ashi ft in species composition.The area presently supports Arctic gray- ling,burbot,longnose sucker,whitefish and Dolly Varden (ADF&G 1981f).Impacts to mainstem habitats are expected to be similar to those presented in Section 2.3.3 (b) (ii)for Watana Reservoir.Effects on tributaries are a1so expected to be similar to those presented for Watana Reservoir.However,most of the tributaries in the Devi1 Canyon impoundment area are characterized by steep slopes with occasional barriers,such as waterfalls.Cheechako, Devil and Tsusena Creeks,three tributaries entering the Devil Canyon impoundment,all contain waterfalls.These fall s would not be inundated by the impoundment and wou 1d still function as effective barriers to fish passage. Thus,the increased overwintering habitat provided by the reservoir may not benefit fish populations in the area. E-3-101 - - - - -, '""" (iii)Operation of Devil Canyon Dam Post-project streamflows under the operation of Devil Can- yon Dam would be similar to those under the operation of Watana Dam alone.Most of the impacts to the aquatic habi- -~tat would have occurred under the start-up and operation of Watana Dam. Few additional impacts are expected to result from opera- tion of Devil Canyon during the open-water season.Changes in streamflow are presented in Tables E.3.27,E.3.28 and E.3.29. -Reservoir Habitat Operation of Devil Canyon Reservoir would likely have effects similar to those discussed for Watana Reservoir. Devil Canyon Reservoir is smaller and its water quality and temperature character i st i cs wou 1d be controlled by Watana Reservoir outflow. Burbot,whitefish,and longnose sucker may be able to utilize reservoir habitats under project operation.Devil Canyon Reservoir woul d provide overwi nteri ng habitat for tributary fish,but this additional habitat may not be utilized.Most of the tributary habitats would be eliminated by the inundation,perhaps reducing the associ ated grayl i ng popul ati on.Fi sh passage barri ers exist on most streams,which would preclude reservoir use by upstream populations. -Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Dam •Mainstem Habitats ..... Flow in approximately 1.5 miles of river between the dam and the powerhouse outlet would be reduced to 500 cfs.This reduction is not expected to adversely affect fish populations in this portion of the river. As described in Section 2.3(b)(iii),use of mainstem habitats may significantly change during operation of Watana Dam.Below the Devil Canyon Dam tailrace,how- ever,there would likely be little additional changes in mai nstem habi tat use duri ng the open-water season. Flow reductions in July and August of 9 and 6 percent, respectively,may slightly increase the magnitude of effects identified under operation of Watana Dam. Under operation of Devil Canyon Dam,winter water temperatures in the Ta lkeetna to Devil Canyon reach will be altered.Water temperatures may be sufficient- 1y warm to prevent the format i on of an ice cover on the E-3-102 rna;nstem and some s;de channels upstream of approx;- mate ly RM lOa,thus the stagi ng and backwater affects associated with an ice cover would not occur in this port i on of the ri ver.Wi nter temperatures in this reach under the operation of Watana Dam are expected to range from a to 1°C..Outflow temperature from Devi 1 Canyon Dam may be 2 to 4°C,with downstream tempera- tures ranging from a to 2°C.Although this is a slight increase over natural conditions,it will preclude an ice cover on most of the ri ver above Ta 1keetna.Impact resulting from altered ice conditions are discussed under Operation of Watana Dam • •Side-Channel Habitats Si de-channel habitats are expected to sustai n impacts similar to those predicted for mainstem habitats under operation of Devil Canyon Dam (see previous section)• •Slough Habitats The changes in streamflow during the open-water season predicted under operation of Devil Canyon are not expected to affect slough habitats.Al terat i on of the thermal regime duri ng winter wi 11 affect a greater number of sloughs than under operation of Watana but effects are expected to be similar to those discussed inSect ion (i i i). -Cook Inlet to Talkeetna No additional impacts are expected to occur in this reach as a result of operation of Devil Canyon Dam.The phys- ical changes to habitats downstream of Talkeetna result- ing from the operation of Watana Dam would likely remain t he same when Devi 1 Canyon Dam commences operat i on.A compari son of proposed downstream flows for Watana Dam alone and with the addition of Devil Canyon is presented for Sunshine Station in Table E.3.28.Changes in streamflow ranges from a reduction of 7 to an increase of 11 percent.Changes in flow of this magnitude are not expected to result in effects different from those identified under the operation of Watana Dam.The addit i on of Dev;1 Canyon woul d probably not result in meani ngful changes in water temperatures,water quality or sediment transport in this reach.Thus,the addition of Devil Canyon Dam is not expected to result in adverse effects on fi shery resources associ ated wi th habitats below Talkeetna. E-3-103 - - - """ -Estuary i!"'"'The operat i on of Devi 1 Canyon Dam is not expected to impact the estuary.Physical changes occurring under operation of Watana alone would essentially remain the same under the operation of both dams. (c)Impacts Associated with Access Roads and Auxiliary Roads (i)Construction -Construction of Watana Access Road and Auxiliary Roads The main access to the Watana Damsite will be from the Dena1 i Hi ghway (APA 1982a).The Watana access road will depart the Dena1 i Hi ghway at mil epost 20 and will run approximately 40 miles south to the dam and camp sites. The northern portion of the route traverses high~rolling~ tundra-covered hills.The road will cross numerous small streams such as Lily Creek ~Seatt1 eCreek ~and Brushkana Creek.The northern streams~which are part of the Nenana Ri ver drai nage~contai n gray1 i ng and probably other resi- dent speci es.The southern part of the road wi 11 cross and parallel Deadman Creek~which also contains grayling and probably other resident species. - The gravel road will have a crown width of approximately 24 feet and wi 11 be constructed over a 1ayer of Typar or similar fabric in some areas.The fabric allows roads to be placed in areas of high organic content and reduces the amount of gravel needed.Before road construction is begun ~a carr i dar at 1east ten feet wi de on ei ther si de of the road itself will be cleared. Short access roads will be needed to reach material sites and disposal sites.The locations and alignments of these aux il i ary access roads wi 11 be determi ned when mater ia 1 sites and disposal sites are identified during final road des i gn. Access construction will involve upgrading the Denali Hi ghway from Cantwell to i ntersecti on with the Watana access road~a distance of 23 miles.At this point~ planned upgrading includes straightening road curves~ i mprovi ng one bri dge~and toppi ng the road with more gravel. Within the project area~the Denali Highway crosses sever- al small drainages~side channels of the Nenana River~ Edmonds Creek and Jack River.Jack River contains gray- ling and the Nenana River in this region supports several species of resident fish. E-3-104 Any bridge work or straightening associated with road upgrading will have potential impacts similar to those resulting from new construction.Extension of culverts in places where th~road is widened could affect fish passage • •Alteration of Water Bodies Stream crossi ngs can be a cause of adverse impacts. Bridges and culverts will be used in fish streams on the mai n access road.These structures need to be properly sized and bedded to ensure fish passage.This subject will be discussed further in Section 2.4.Other causes of adverse impacts due to road construction can result from the following: Clearing Clearing must take place in areas of dense or tall vegetation before road building can begin.In some upland areas with tundra vegetation,clearing will be minimal.Clearing can cause degradat.ion of habitat when: 1.Cl eared areas by streams and 1akes are not stabi 1i zed and erode into the water body; 2.Cleared material is pushed into water bodies causing blockage of fish movements,deposition of organics on substrates and downstream erosion;and 3.Clearing along streams affects cover,avail- abil ity of food organi SinS and temperatures in that stream stretch. In-stream Activity Ouri ng road construction,it may be necessary for heavy equipment to enter water bodies.This can alter the substrate and can cause turbi dity and sedimentati on. Erosion Erosion can result from in-stream use of heavy equipment,placement of fill with high organic and/or fines content,lack of stabilization or revegetation on fills and cuts and inadequately placed or sized culverts.The increased sedimentation that may result can degrade downstream habitats. E-3-105 ,- - - - .".. Fill Pl acement Fills that are placed within floodplains and streams can remove habitat previ ously used by fi sh.The severity of the impact depends upon the type and amount of habitat covered. Roads can block sheet flow to or across wetl ands. When a road bisects a wetland within sufficient drainage,one side becomes ponded while the other side dries.The change in water quantity will affect the vegetation and the nature of the wetland. Some wetlands that are contiguous with streams provi de reari ng habitat for juvenil e fi sh.If the wetlands are dewatered,that habitat can be reduced or lost.Potential alterations of sheet flow are being considered during the detailed road design • •Changes in Water Quality As with dam construction,impacts on water quality during road construction will result mainly from erosion and pet- roleum product spills.Erosion may occur due to excava- tion for placement of drainage structures in streams,run- off from disposal sites,~un-off from unstabilized fills, placement of material within water bodies,and heavy equi pment operati ng withi n streams.The road will pri- marily affect small,clear water systems. Si nce the systems to be crossed by the road are most 1ike:" ly clear water grayling streams,they would be among the moresensiti ve habitats to petrol eum products.Chroni c or large spills into these streams during construction could have severe effects upon the biota,either causing mortal- ities or causing fish and their food organisms to .avoid contaminated areas (Maynard and Weber 1981,Weber et al. 1981).When equipment is operated in streams or refueling of equi pment takes pl ace withi n a fl oodpl ai n,petrol eum products are likely to enter the water. •Disruptions of Fish Populations Fish will tend to avoid areas where in-stream work is bei ng conducted,areas contami nated by petroleum products or,depending on the circumstance,areas experiencing excessi ve turbi dity.Barri ers to fi sh movements and migrations are created when streams are diverted,flumed, or blocked during installation of drainage structures. Fish can also be prevented from moving upstream if the drainage structure is incorrectly installed.Pumping water from streams can adversely affect local populations by entraining juvenile fish. E-3-106 Duri ng road constructi on,the area between the Denali Hi ghway and the Watana dam site wi 11 be occupi ed by hundreds of workers.Although this area has been recreationally utilized in past years,it'has not experienced such a large influx of people.Unless control 1ed,thi s i nfl ux can increase fi shi ng pressure on the streams and lakes in the area. -Construction of Devil Canyon Access Road and Auxiliary Roads Access to the Devil Canyon damsite will either be by road north of the Susitna Ri ver from Watana or by rai 1 from Go 1d Creek south of the Sus itna.The road wi 11 depart from the Watana road north of the Watana townsite and will para 11 el Tsusena Creek for approximately 1.5 mi 1es.The route then roughly follows the 2900 foot contour west to Devi 1 Creek.The road turns south along Devi 1 Creek for about 2 miles and proceeds southwesterly to intersect the Susitna Ri ver at approximately RM 150,where the road crosses the Susitna and parallel s an unnamed creek for a short distance,ending at the construction camp/village site. For most of the Devil Canyon access road traverses hi gh tundra.Dense shrub vegetation and trees are not encoun- tered until the road nears the Susitna Ri ver crossi ng downstream of Devi 1 Canyon.The road crosses numerous small streams between Tsusena and Devil Creeks.Tsusena Creek contains grayling and possibly cottids and white- fish.Devil Creek may support populations of grayling, suckers,cottids and whitefi she Between Devil Creek and the Susttna River,there appear to be few areas that host fish. The railroad access will leave the existing railroad at Gold Creek and proceed north to the construction camp site.It will remain on the south side of the Susitna River.The railroad will cross Gold Creek,which is known to contai n chi nook sal mon (ADF&G 1982a)and wi 11 cross at least three tributaries that enter the Susitna River near Slough 19.These tributaries most likely do not contain fish,but are probably an important source of clear water for the slough,which is a spawning area for salmon.The railroad will then parallel Jack Long Creek for approxi- mately 3 miles.Jack Long Creek has been documented to contain pink,coho,chinook.and chum salmon.It is assumed that the road between Watana and Devil Canyon will be constructed in the same manner as the segment from the Denali Highway (see Section 3.3 (a)(i)). E-3-107 - -- ..... .... (i i) •Alterations of Waterbodies Impacts to aquatic habitat will result from stream cros- sings and other instream activities. Considerable floodplain and side channel habitat in Devil Creek,Tsusena Creek,and Jack Long Creek ~ou1d be affected by road and railroad a1 i gnment.Encroachments on streams often reduce sheet flow and flow from springs to the river and cut off side channels and wetland areas.These encroachment soften requ ire construct ion of river training structures to protect road integrity. These structures can further alter the ri ver system, often causi ng degradation of aquatic habitat.Stream cross i ngs and dra i nage structures have been di scussed. The problems that may occur on the Denali Highway to Watana segment are also app 1i cab 1e to the Devi 1 Canyon access. Constructi on of a railroad between Devil Canyon and Gold Creek wou1 d present simil ar problems as road construct- ion:aquatic habitat will be affected by gravel mining, fills,clearing and stream crossings.However,in wet- land areas,there is the option of building on trestles rather than fill.This would be less disruptive to natural water movement within the wetland • •Changes in Water Quality It is expected that water quality wi 11 be affected by turbidity and petroleum product spills as has been discussed for Watana access. •Disruptions of Fish Populations Fi sh popu1 ati ons in areas affected by the Devil Canyon road,auxi 1 iary roads or the rai 1road wi 11 experi ence disruptions similar to those previously described for Watana access. Operation and Maintenance of Roads -Operation of Watana Access Road and Auxiliary Roads Impacts due to the operation of the road system wi 11 likely result from road traffic and maintenance activi- ties • •Alteration of Waterbodies Alteration of waterbodies during road operation will occur as a result of continued maintenance activities. Maintenance involves road grading and replacement of E-3-108 materi ale Improper mai ntenance techni ques can result in gravel being pushed off the roadway into streams and wetlands and in increased erosion.Road maintenance would have a greater impact on the smaller streams, such as Deadman Creek,than on the Susitna River. This section considers only the road section from the Denal i Hi ghway to Watana Dam,therefore,impacts resulting from road construction will be confined to systems along this road alignment • •Changes in Water Quality During road operations,changes in water quality can occur as a result of fuel spills,and erosion from poorly stabilized roadways.Fuel spills would have the most potential impact. The Watana acceSs road will cross numerous streams, many of whi ch contai n fi she In areas where the road crosses or encroaches on a water body,an accident involving large vehicles,including those carrying petro 1eum products,cou1 d occur.The impacts associ a- ted with spills will depend upon the season,the type of substance spi 11 ed,the si ze of the system,and the species present. Erosion from unstable road cuts could be locally chronic,however,these activities are not expected to cause major impacts • •Disturbance to Fish Populations Fi sh have been shown to avoi d areas contami nated with petroleum products (Maynard &Weber 1981,Weber et ale 1981)and areas of excessive sedimentation or turbi- dity.Chronic seepage of oil into streams or lakes could render some areas unusable. Fish impasses due to either physical or velocity barriers have been discussed under Section 3.3(c)(i). Possibly the greatest source of adverse impacts upon fish populations is the increased accessibility of fish streams and 1akes to fi shermen.Th is will be a greater impact than that resulting from operation of the camps because the network of access roads and auxiliary roads will increase access to lakes and streams. As stated in Section 2.3(c)(i),the Watana access road will cross Brushkana,Lily,Seattle,and Deadman Creeks as well as other small unnamed streams.These creeks £-3-109 - ""'"I .. - '""I oIIdl, - ~, Transmission Lines Impacts ,~, ,..., (d) (i) are cl ear water streams and are usually·i nhabi ted by grayling.Deadman Creek,in particular,is known for its 1arge and abundant popul ation of grayli ng.The reaches above the fall s and below Deadman Lake are considered prime grayling habitat.By subjecting this stream to increased fishing pressure many of the larger,older fish may be removed from the population thus causing a decrease in productivity.A similar impact may occur to other grayling streams in the area. -Operation of Devil Canyon Access Road Auxiliary Roads,and Railroad Aquatic habitat and fish populations will be influenced by the operation of roads and railroads through activi- ties such as road traffic and maintenance. •Alteration of Waterbodies The majority of adverse impacts will have occurred dur- ing road construction.Activities such as road grading and replacement of drainage structures will continue to affect stream systems. •Changes in Water Qual ity The impacts described on water qual ity that may occur during operation of the Watana access road,are also appl icable to the Devil Canyon access road and auxil- i ary roads. •Disruptions of Fish Populations Di srupti ons of fi sh popul at ions resulting from opera- tion of the Devil Canyon access road,auxiliary roads and railroad most likely will be:avoidance of areas of unacceptable turbidity,sedimentation and contamina- tion;blockages of fish passage and increased accessi- bility to lakes and streams. Construction of Transmission Line -Watana Dam The transmission line \'Iill be built from Watana Dam to Go 1d Creek on a route that crosses the Sus itna Ri ver below Watana Dam,runs south of the Susitna to the Devil Canyon constructi on area,then foll ows the proposed railroad from Devil Canyon to Gold Creek.At Gold Creek E-3-110 the transmission system will converge with the Anchorage- Fairbanks intertie,which extenQs from Willow to Healy. The route south of Willow will extend to Point MacKenzie where a submari ne cabl e will cross Knik Arm.The termi nus of the southern 1eg wi 11 be the Uni versity substation in Anchorage.The northern leg will extend from Healy to Ester near Fairbanks. A transmission line consists of a series of steel towers that support conductors.In this case,the towers will be x-framed guyed towers that can carry three conductors. From Watana to Gold Creek,there will be two parallel sets of towers.At Gold Creek,two 1i nes will go to Anchorage and two to Fairbanks.This wi 11 necessitate construction of one new line parallel to the intertie between Willow and Healy and two new lines north of Healy and south of Wi 11 ow.With the additi on of Devi 1 Canyon Dam,two more lines will be built from Devil Canyon to Gold Creek.This will result in an arrangement of 4 parallel lines of towers in this area. Throughout the majority of the route,a 400 foot wide right-of-way will be designated.The Devil Canyon -Gold Creek segment will require a 500 foot wide right-of-way. Within the right-of-way,trees and shrubs within 55 feet of the tower centerl i ne wi 11 be cl eared as well as any other trees or shrubs that may hamper construction or pose a threat to the completed line.Clearing width for a 3-1 ine corri dor woul d be approximately 350 feet (Commonwealth et al.1982). The towers within the corridor will be located about 1300 feet apart.The type of foundation used to support the towers wi 11 depend upon the substrate.Standard instal- lation involve driving two,25 foot long steel pilings into the ground to anchor the tower and two 15 foot long cables.For wetlands,the pilings will be 50 feet long and the anchor cables 30 feet long (APA 1982)• •Alteration of Waterbodies Adverse impacts of waterbodi es wi 11 result primarily from cl eari ng stream cross;ngs,and other i nstream activities associated with installation of the towers and conductors.Permanent roads will not be bui 1t and gravel requirements will be minimal.The effects of clearing and heavy equipment traffic have been previ- ously discussed. The transmissiori line can be divided into four seg- ments:central (Watana to Gold Creek),Intertie (Willow to Healy),northern (Healy to Ester),and E-3-111 - ..... ..... southern (Willow to Anchorage).In the central section,the line will cross a number of small unnamed tributaries entering the south bank of the Susitna River.The impact of constructing a transmission line through this area will be similar to,but less than, that of the access road (see Section 3.3{c)(i)). The Anchorage-Fairbanks Intertie is being built as a separate project and will be completed in 1984 (Common- wealth et a1.1982).The Susitna project will add another line of towers within the same right-of-way. The impacts will be similar to those experienced during i ntert i e construction.The Environmental Assessment Report for the intertie (Commonwealth et a1.1982) discusses the expected environmental effects of transmission line construction in this segment.Fish streams that will be crossed include the Nenana River, Talkeetna River,Chuni1a Creek,Susitna River,and the Kashwitna River. In the southern segment,the transmi ssi on 1i ne wi 11 begin at the Willow substation approximately one half mile north of Willow Creek.Proceeding south,the 1 ine will be routed between the Susitna River and the Nancy Lake area,passing within 0.75 miles of the river.It will cross several Susitna River tributaries including Fish Creek at approximate milepost (AMP)18,before crossing the Little Susitna at AMP 26.Few streams are crossed between the Little Susitna River and Knik Arm at AMP 44.Knik Arm,which is approximately 2.5 miles wide at that point,is crossed by a submarine cable. The Knik Arm switching station is located between Sixmi1e Creek and Eagle River.From there the trans- mission line bypasses Otter Lake,and crosses the Alaska Railroad and Fossil Creek.After crossing the Davis Highway it parallels the Glenn Highway for about 2 miles.Ship Creek is crossed at AMP 75 and traverses the Chugach Foothi 11 s before termi nat i ng at the University substation near the corner of Tudor and Muldoon Roads. The northern portion begins at the Healy substation and immediately crosses the Nenana River,proceeding west to Dry Creek at AMP 4.75.The 1i ne turns north at thi s point and roughly parallels the Parks Highway for the majority of its length.The Nenana River is crossed agai n at AMP 2.75 and AMP 58.75.The 1i ne ends at the Ester Substation (AMP 94.25). Dur-ing transmission line construction,it will be necessary for heavy equi pment such as hydroaxes and drill rigs to cross streams.Several factors will in- fluence the severity of impact on the aquatic habitat. E-3-112 1.Season in which construction takes place; 2.Size of the system; 3.Type of habitat in the crossing area; 4.Species present; 5.Frequency of crossi ng; 6.Type of crossing,i.e.temporary bridge,temporary culvert,low water crossing; 7.Stream bank configuration;and 8.Stream bed composition. It is expected that small,confi ned systems wi 11 be more susceptible to adverse impacts from transmission line construction than will larger streams. The access points for construction of the transmission line will be decided during the detailed design.The Willow to Healy section will probably use access established during construction of the Intertie.It is 1 ikely that access will require crossi ng streams and wetl ands and thus expand the area in which adverse impacts due to transmission line construction may occur. Details of the installation of the cable under Knik Arm are to be developed during final design.Knik Arm is primarily a migration route for anadromous species that util ize the Knik and t~atanuska Ri ver drainages. Benthi c organi sms and other resi dent speci es are sparce due to the excessive amount of glacial material on the sea floor.It is unlikely that alteration of this area will have any effect upon resident or anadromous spe- cies. Changes in Water Quality It is expected that temporary increases in turbi dity and sedimentation will occur in streams subjected to instream activities during construction of the trans- mission line.Temperatures in stream reaches where vegetation is removed may slightly increase,but this increase is expected to have an insignificant effect upon species in the area.Small,clear water systems wi 11 most 1 ikely be affected to a greater extent than will large systems.The effects are not expected to be long-term. In addition,streams that are crossed will be exposed to possible contamination by petroleum products due primarily to vehicle accidents. E-3-113 - - - (i i) •Disturbance of Fish Populations Avoidance reactions associated with increased turbidity and petroleum product contamination may occur.Fish will also avoid areas where instream activities occur and~depending upon the timing,migrations may be affected.Cl eari ng may remove overhangi n9 vegetation that provides cover for fish. Construct i on of the 1i ne wi 11 open areas to increased fishing.During construction,this will most likely be confined to workers.The effects may be greater in the northern segment where access has previously been 1i mited. Operation of the Transmission Line -Watana Dam Once the transmission line has been built,there will be very few acti vit i es associ ated with routine mai ntenance of towers and 1i nes that coul d adversely affect aquatic habitat. •Alteration of Waterbodies Some localized habitat disruption could occur when maintenance vehicles need to cross wetlands and streams to repair damaged lines or towers.In most cases,per- manent roads are not buil tin conjunction with trans- mi ss ion 1i nes.Rather,revegetat ion is allowed to proceed to a certai n extent around the towers.The vegetation is usually limited to grasses and shrubs and not large trees so that vehicles are able to follow the cleared ar-ea associated with the 1 ines.Streams may need to be forded in order to effect repairs.Depend- i ng on the season ,crossing location,type and fre- quency of vehicle traffic,aquatic habitat in the imme- diate vicinity of the crossing could be affected.In additi on,downstream reaches may be affected by in- creased sedimentation due to erosion. •Changes in Water Quality Changes in water quality during operation of the trans- mission lines are likely to result from increased tur- bidity,instream activities,possible contamination from fuels. •Disturbance to Fish Populations I nstream act i viti es associ ated with 1i ne repair and maintenance could cause disruptions of fish populations E-3-114 in 1 imited areas.The greatest di srupt i on wi 11 result from the increased accessibility to some fishing areas from the cl eared transmi ss ion corri dar.Because the vegetation is kept relatively low,hikers and all terrai n vehi cl es can use the corri dors as trai 1 s. In winter,snowmachines also traverse these cleared areas.This will result in greater numbers of fi shermen bei ng abl e to reach areas that previously experienced little or no fishing pressure.This effect wi 11 be more acute in areas where the new transmi ssi on route diverges from existing roads and transmission lines,such as south of Willow and north of Healy.The area between Healy and Willow will have been subjected to disturbance and increased pressure during construction of the Anchorage/Fairbanks Intertie.Any increased pressure from the Sus itna power system wi 11 probably be minor.The presence of an operating cable under Knik Arm should cause no impacts to fish populations. £-3-115 - - ,""", - 2.5 -AguaticStudies Program The aquatic studies program is an integral part of tf~e continuing plan- ning and design for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project';.The information presented in this document is primarily bas~d on results of 1981 field studies with some preliminary information from the-1982 study program. Interpretation and analysis of the 1982 data is in progress and supple- mental reports contai ni ng the results of these qnalysi s will be com- pleted in June 1983.Continuing field.~pata/-collections have been funded through the 1982-1983 winter season.,..,MqJeling efforts have been initiated to incorporate all project data Tnto a quantified impact assessment.Scopes of work for the 1984 field season are being devel- opment.As information becomes available from field studies and impact analysis,the conceptual mitigation pl an will be refined into a de- tailed plan specifying number,location,and design of mitigation features. Additional studies will evolve from the analysis of the previous stud- ies.As a more refined understanding of project impacts and viable mitigation features is acquired,the emphasis of the study program will shift towards providing the design criteria needed to implement the mitigation features.The aquatic studies will produce the information required to prepare mi ti gati on pr ograms for the preconstruct ion,con- struction,filling"and operational phases of the project. (a)Preconstruction Phase During the preconstruction phase,the aquatic studies program wi 11 : -Provide supplemental information required for support of the license application; -Continue to define seasonal habitat relationships; -Continue quantifying the predicted impacts;and -Evaluate the proposed mitigating measures. The need for specific tasks will be translated into field programs. (b)Construction Phase During the planning for construction,information will be needed to properly design site facilities and schedule construction activities to avoid impacts to aquatic habitats.Incorporating environmental design criteria into design,siting,and scheduling activities is a major feature of the construction migitation plan. Review of proposed actions and facilities will generate the need for some add it i ona 1 data.These needs wi 11 be trans 1ated into an orderly field study program.Environmental desi gn criteri a wi 11 be incorporated duri ng the planni ng stage in order to avo;d or minimize impacts. E-3-116 (c)Filling and Operation Phases Dur"ing filHng and operation,monitoring studies will·permit re- finement Off mitigation features to improve performance. 2.6 -Monitoring 'Studies As discussed in Section 1.3 and the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Miti- gation Policy Report,monitQ'fing studies are recognized as an essential project mitigation feiture that provides for a reduction of impacts over ti me.Monitori ng~wi 11 be conducted duri ng project constructi on and operation for the following: -To insure that good construction practi ces are bei ng employed on the project; -To evaluate the effectiveness of the operation and maintenance of mitigation features;and -To recommend changes in construction practices or mitigation features to further avoid,minimize,or reduce impacts. (a)Construction Monitoring Construction monitoring will consist of monitoring construction activities to ensure that proper construction practices,as de- tailed in the project construction practices manual,are being followed a.nd that project facilities are being properly main- tained.This monitoring activity will cover all project facili- ties,including access road construction and maintenance,camp and Village construction,material removal,washing operations for dam construction,reservoir clearing,abandonment,and rehabilitation acti viti es. (b)Operational Monitoring Op_erational monitoring will be conducted tiveness of the project mitigation plan. be monitored to evaluate if an adequate being achieved include: to evaluate the effec- Mitigation features to level of mitigation is Sloughs; Mainstem and side channel salmon spawning areas; -The grayling population provided by the stocking program;and -The fixed-cone valves designed to avoid gas supersaturation. The monitoring activity will include evaluating the operation and maintenance prcicedures to ensure that the facilities are operating effectively. E-3-1l7 2.4 -Mitigation Issues and Proposed Mitigating Measures ,~ .~ (a)Mitigation of Construction Impacts Upon Fish and Aquatic Habitats Mitigation of construction impacts is achieved primarily by in- corporat ing env i ronmental criter ia into pre-constructi on pl ann ing and desi'gn t and to good construction practices.By incorporating env ironmental criteri a into design act iv it i es t constructi on of the Susitna dams and related facilities impacts to aquatic habitats wi 11 be avoided or minimized. The aquatic studies program will make major contributions to pre- construction planning and design.Studies will be used in siting t design t and schedul ing of project facil ities and activities.For example t the final al ignment of the Watana access road will take into consideration the fish streams along its route.The road is sited to avoid encroachment on streams t to minimize t stream and crossings and impacts at required crossings and to minimize cut banks. Biological information will be incorporated into design criteria and construction practices.A high degree of communication and cooperat i on wi 11 be maintained between env ironmental staffs and design and construction personnel in order to facil itate integra- tion of biological criteria into designs,specifications,and construction practices. Schedul ingof construction activities is an important aspect of pre-construction pl anning and is another means of avoiding or minimizing adverse impacts to fish and aquatic habitats.Whenever possible,activities will be scheduled to avoid known sensitive periods. Continued monitoring of the construction facil ities and activities will ensure that impacts to the aquatic environment are avoided or minimized.lV1onitoring can identify areas that may need rehabil i- tation or maintenance t and areas where previous mitigation measures have proven inadequate and remed ial action must be taken. Potential impacts are identified in Section 2.3.The following is a discussion of the impact issues and the mitigation measures that will be applied during and after construction.Those issues con- sidered to have the greatest potential for adverse impact to the aquatic environment are discussed first.Avoidance t minimization, rectification and reduction of impacts are discussed. (i)Stream Crossings and Encroachments -Impact Issue Improperl y constructed stream crossings can block fi sh movements and/or increase erosion into the stream.Roads with inadequate drainage can al ter run-off patterns to nearby wetl ands and streams. E-3-120 -Mit i gat ion The objective in constructing stream crossings is to maintain the natural stream configuration (Lauman 1976) and flow so that passage of fish is assured.Maintenance of fish passage is required under AAS 16.840.For the project area,the evaluation species used in developing criteria for stream crossing is Arctic grayling.In constructing a crossing consideration will be given to the following:presence or absence of fish/fish habitat, location of crossing,type of crossing structure,flow regime and method of installation . •Location of Crossing Project roads will be al igned and located to minimize the number of stream crossings.When crossings are unavoidable,the crossing will be located to cross the stream at a rightangle in a stream stretch that is straight (Lauman 1976),and with narrow stable banks which do not require cutting or excessive stabiliza- tion.The crossings will be located so that important habitats,such as spawning beds and overwintering areas,are not disrupted • .Type of Crossing Structure Open-bottom arch culverts wi 11 be install ed wherever possible.Multiplate elliptical and oversized circular cul verts can al so be used to maintain the natural stream bed (Joyce,Rundquist and Moulton 1980 and Lauman 1976)and wi 11 be used when open arch culverts are not feasible.Standard size circular culverts will only be used in intermittent drainages that do not constitute fish habitat. Cu 1vert s wi 11 be des i gned to the Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game criteri a needed to pass grayl ing at cri- tical times.Culverts will be set to avoid perching and will be armored,when necessary,to minimize erosion at the outlet. Log stringer and temporary bridges wi 11 be used where infrequent,light vehicle traffic is expected.Their use on the Susitna Project will be limited to the transmission line corridor.During winter transmission line construction,snow and ice bridges will be used to cross streams. E-3-121 ~I - - ~i ..... ""'"I ..... (i i) (iii) Methods of Installation When culverts other than open-bottom arches are used~ streams will be diverted around the work area until the crossi ng is comp 1eted.On small systems ~the stream may be f1umed.Diversion or f1uming will reduce the amount of sediment transport. In some areas,roads and transmi ssi on 1i nes must parallel a stream or river.The alignment will be away from the f1oodp1 ai n to the greatest extent possible. Where this is not possible,the road will be aligned to preclude channelization of the stream. The transmission towers wi 11 be aligned so structures are out of streams and f1 oodp 1ai ns to the best extent practical.Instream activities will be confined to i nst all at ion of drai nage structures on access routes. Where pract i ca 1~construct i on wi 11 be schedu1 ed for wi nter months when heavy equi pment can cross frozen creeks without elaborate constructed crossings. Increased Fishing Pressure -Impact Issue The sport fishing pressure on the local streams and lake wi 11 substant i ally increase.The access,road and por- tions of the transmission line will allow fishermen to reach areas previously unexp10ited. -Mitigation During the construction phase,access to the streams will be limited by closing roads to unauthorized traffic.The Alaska Board of Fisheries will be provided such informa- t i on as they requi re to manage the fi sheri es.Some streams,such as Deadman Creek,will require modification of current seasons and catch limits if current stocks are to be maintained.These regulations may take the form of reduced seasons or catch limits,imposition of maximum size limits or control of fishing methods.Since public health regulations will not allow sport-caught fish to be stored or prepared at public food service facilities,the project policy will be that all fishing is restricted to c atch-and-re 1ease. Erosion Control -Impact Issue Sustained high levels of sediment in a system can change the species composition of the system (Bell 1973,A1yeska E-3-122 #,1 .j ,\,{ ~ Pipeline Service Company 1974).Siltation can affect development of fish eggs and benthic food organisms. -Mitigation The primary mitigation measures that will be used to minimize construction erosion are:1)location of facil- ities away from the clear water fish streams;2)employ erosion control measures such as run off control, stilling basins and revegetation;3)schedule erosion- producing activities at biologically non-critical seasons (APSe 1974);4)minimize the time necessary to complete the activity so that erosion is a short-term,non- reoccurring problem;and 5)maintenance of vegetated buffer zones. The natural vegetation in an area is a major factor in preventing erosion (APSe 1974).Clearing for roads, transmission lines and other facilities will be confined to the minimum area necessary.For transmission lines, only taller trees and shrubs will be removed;the vegeta- tive mat itself need not be disturbed.Adjacient to streams,especially small systems,clearing will be done by hand.Cleared material will be removed from the floodplain to approved disposal sites,if it is not salvaged or burned on site. Disposal sites that contain cleared slash and substandard materials (overburden)will be located in upland loca- tions away from waterbodies.Disposal sites will be constructed so that nei ther run-off duri ng breakup nor rainfall will wash silty material into streams.This may entail run-off control structures,surrounding the dis- posal site with berms,or channeling run-off through containment ponds. If run-off is expected to carry si lt to nearby water- bodies from a construction site,settling basins will be built.Clarified water will be dicharged into receiving waters at an approved point. Proper grading,mulching and revegetation of cut and fill areas will be used to avoid chronic erosion. (iv)Material Removal -Impact Issue ; Removal of floodplain gravel can cause erosion,silta- tion,increased turbidity,increased glaciation,fish entrapment and a lterat i on of fi sh habitat. E-3-123 ~I -I ..... - -Mitigation Adverse impacts on aquatic habitats will be avoided or minimized by .app1 ication of guidelines more fully dis- cussed in Joyce,Rundquist and Moulton (1980b),and in Burger and Swenson (1977). Before floodplain material sites are used,it will first be determined that upland sources are inadequate to sup- ply the needed material.Floodplain sites will be thor- oughly explored to verify that they can supply the neces- sary quantities.Important habitats such as overwinter- ing and spawning areas will be identified and avoided. Buffers of undisturbed vegetation will be retained be- tween the sites and any active channels.The site will conform to the natural river features,including shaping gravel bars to conform to their original shape and exca- vating to provide irregular plane (shorelines)and pro- file (depths).If possible,mining will be scheduled to avoid conflicts with fi sh migrat ions,spawn ing,or other important occurrences.If mining is to occur during the winter,buffer zones and other sensitive areas will be f1 agged to avoid disturbance.Si tes wi 11 be located to avoid or minimize instreamwork.Mining areas that may trap fish will not be created.Material will be stock- piled outside the floodplain to avoid backing flow at higher stages and the poss"ibil ity of material being eroded into downstream reaches.Overburden wi 11 be di s- posed of in upland sites or returned,contoured and planted. Material washing operations will recycle water and will not discharge into adj acent streams • The Tsusena Creek materi a1 site will be rehabil itated after mining has ceased.The goal of rehabilitation will be to return the system to productive aquatic habitat. The site will be shaped and contoured to enhance fi sh habitat (Joyce,Rundquist and Moulton,1980b),and all man-made items removed from the site.Exposed slopes wi 11 be graded and seeded.C1 ear water in sett1 ing ponds wi 11 be removed.The drained ponds will be covered with gravel,contoured and seeded to avoid erosion. Rehabi1 itated areas will be monitored to ensure that grading,revegetation and other mitigation measures are effective.The Cheechako Creek and Susitna River borrow sites will be inundated and will not require rehabil ita- tion. E-3-124 (v)Oil and Hazardous Material Spills -Impact Issue Oil spills into streams are toxic to fish and their food organi sms. -Mit i gat i on An oi 1 and hazardous materi als transfer,storage and accident response plan will be developed as part of the construction practice manuals required by Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Equipment refueling or repair will not be allowed in or near floodplains without adequate provisions to prevent the escape of oi 1.Waste oi 1 wi 11 be removed from the site and be di sposed of using ADEC/EPA approved proce- dures.Fuel storage tanks wi 11 be located away from waterbodies and within lined,bermed areas capable of containing 110 percent of the tank volume.Fuel tanks will be metered and all outflow of fuel accounted for. All fuel "I i nes wi 11 be located in aboveground or ground surface utilidors to facilitate location of ruptured or sheared fuel lines. Vehicle accidents,although difficult to fully protect against,can be minimized by constructing the roads with proper ly des i1gned curves to accommodate wi nter dri vi ng conditions.The roads will be adequately signed and during the winter,difficult stretches will be regularly cleared and sanded.In summer,dust control wi 11 be accomplished with water. State law requires that all oil spills,no matter how small,be reported to DEC.Personnel will be assigned to monitor storage and transfer of oil and fuel;and to identify and cleanup spilled oil and other hazardous material. All personnel employed on the project,especi ally field personnel,will be trained to respond to fuel spills in accordance with the approved oil spill contingency plan. The plan will include a manual and training program describing: Actions to take as a first line of defense in the event of a fuel spi 11. Contact persons in the construction organization and in state agencies. E-3-125 ~, - (vi) (vi l) .The locations of sensitive habitats . .The location of all oil spill control and clean-up equipment,the types of equipment at each location,and appropriate procedures. Records to keep during an oil spill and clean-up operat ion. Oi 1 spi 11 equi pment wi 11 be appropri ate to the types of spills expected during the project and adequate to handle the largest spill expected.Personnel will be trained in the operati on of the equi pment and the equipment wi 11 be inventoried and tested regularly to make sure it is in proper working order in the event of an emergency (Bohme and Brushett 1979,Lindstedt-Siva 1979). Water Removal -Impact Issue Fish fry and juveniles can be impinged on intake screens or entrained into hoses and pumps. -Mitigation If possible,surface water withdrawal will be from streams or 1 akes that do not contai n fi sh.If water must be withdrawn from a fish-bearing waterbody,the Al aska Department of Fish and Game intake design criteria will be used for all intakes. The ADF&G criteri a are that:1)all intakes should be screened;2)openi ngs in the screen shoul d not exceed 0.04 sq.in.;and 3)water velocity at the screen should not exceed 0.1 fps.No more than 20 percent of the instantaneous flow will be removed at any time. Blasting -Impact Issue Blasting in or near fish streams can rupture swim bladders and damage incubating embryos. -Mitigation The Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game has standard blasting guidelines that establish the distance from water bodies at which charges can be detonated without harming fish.Blasting will be accomplished using these guidelines. E-3-126 (viii)Susitna River Diversions -Impact Issue Fish passing downstream through the diversion tunnels are expected to be lost because of the high tunnel velocities (over 18 ft/sec during summer flows that exceed 20,000 cfs and 20 ft/sec during winter).During summer, relatively few fish are present in the tunnel entrance vicinity.During winter,resident fish are expected to overwinter in the head pond above the upstream cofferdam. -Mitigation The fish lost in the diversion tunnel,primarily in the winter,would have been lost during reservoir filling. Mitigation for these losses is discussed under Mitigation for Inundation Impacts in Section 2.4(b). (ix)Water Quality Changes -Impact Issue Discharge of camp effluents result in increased levels of metals and nutrient loading.Concrete batching plants release high alkoline effluents. ...., - -Mitigation Effluents will standards. comply with ADEC/USEPA effluent The concrete batching effluent will be neutralized prior to discharge to avoid impacts related to change in the pH of the receiving water. (x)Clearing the Impoundment Area -Statement of Issue Removing vegetation along streams can lead to accelerated erosi on into the streams altered temperature regimes and equipment entering perennial or ephemeral stream ways. -Mitigation Clearing will be scheduled as close to reservoir filling as is feasible.Disturbance to the vegetative mat will be avoided.Erosion control methods will be employed wherever needed to minimize unnecessary erosion to streams.To the extent practical,clearing will take place during the winter. E-3-127 ..- ..... (b)Mitigation of Filling and Operation Impacts (i)Approach to Mitigation The objective of the fisheries mitigation,as discussed in Section 1.3,is to mitigate the adverse impacts of the Susitna Project on fish resources using the heirarchical approach to mitigation contained in the Susitna Hydro- electric Prbject,U.S.Fish and Wildlife and Alaska Department of Fish and Game mitigation pol icies.The five basic mitigative actions,in order of priority,are: ·Avoiding impacts through design features or schedul ing activities to avoid loss of resources . •Minimizing impacts by carefully schedul ing and locating operations,timing and controlling flow releases,and controlling impacts through best management practices. ·Rectifying impacts by repairing disturbed areas to pro- vide optional fish habitat and re-establishing fish in repa i red areas. ·Reducing or eliminating impacts over time through monitoring,maintenance and proper training of project personnel. ·Compensating for impacts by conducting habitat construc- tion activities that rehabilitate altered habitat or managing resources on project or nearby public lands to increase habitat values. Each of the following impact issues is addressed in terms of these five mitigation actions.Figure E.3.30 summari zes mitigation features for major impact issues associated with operation of the project. (ii)Mitigation of Downstream Impacts Associated with Flow Regime -Impact Issue As described in Exhibit A,the proposed project consists of two stages,the first stage (Watana-development)and the second stage (Watana-Dev il Canyon development).Each stage requires its own flow release schedule during both filling and operation.The flow release schedule is designed to provide a bal ance between fill ing power gen- eration and instream flow requirements.The initial filling of Watana reservoir will take approximately three years using a flow release schedule as shown in Table E.3.17.After filling is complete,Watana Dam power E-3-128 plant will be operated outlined in Table E3.24.Devil Canyon Dam reservoir wi 11 be fi 11 ed in about five months following the Watana filling schedule.The operation of the two dam stage will result in a flow regime in Table 3.27.Flows in these tables are stated for a gage at Gold Creek. As discussed in Section 2.3,a primary fishery concern is to provide suitable flows between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon that: ·Allow adult salmon access to tributary spawning areas; Allow adult salmon access to slough spawning habitat; •Maintain a suitable water depth on the spawning beds throughout the spawning period; •Maintain flow through the spawning gravels during the incubation period;and •Provide a flow-related stimulus to stimulate the out- migration of fry. Additional fisheries concerns rel ated to instream flow needs of resident and juvenile anadromous fishes include the need to: ·Mainta.in overwintering and summer feeding habitat;and Maintain access to tributary spawning and rearing habitat. Measures To Avoid Impacts Adverse impacts to fi shery resources resul ting from flow alteration can be avo'ided or minimized through selection of an appropriate flow regime.While hydroelectric developments with storage facil ities al ter the natural flow regime in the river,changes in streamflow patterns do not necessarily result in adverse impacts to fish pop- ul ations.For example,if low flows are 1 imiting fish populations then supplementing low flow may result in enhancement to that population. It is presently considered that the proposed project flows will i act salmon.The proposed summer flow of 12,000 cfs ef .e..n Ju 1y 25 and September 15,may not allow free asa:ge"'Q.~~adults into some spawning sloughs. In addition,,~~,~sp'a:~ning area within the slough may be reduced becai:.r~"oC)reduced upwell ing.Al though the aquatic studies program is continuing to evaluate flow requirements,it is bel ieved that flows needed to avoid E-3-129 - I~ "'" any impacts to adult salmon in the July 25 -September 15 period may be the range of 18~000 to 20~000 cfs at Gold Creek. -Measures To Minimize Impacts A flow release schedule will be used that minimizes the loss of downstream habitat and maintains normal timing of flow-related biological stimuli.One criterion that in- fluences the establ ishment of the flow release schedule is the choice of the key fish·species and/or 1 ife stage to be protected.The evaluation species and 1 ife stage for each time unit has been identified.Instream flow requirements are being determined for each species/l ife stage/time unit combination.A flow regime that is bene- ficial to one evaluation species/life stage may adversely affect another.A hi erarchy of the spec ies/l ife stages is establ ished and preference is given to the species with the higher priority.The species/life stage hier- archy for this proposed project is based on the evalua- tion of the species important to the region as COllll11er- cial~recreational~subsistence~and aesthetic resources and their value to the ecosystem.In _the reach between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon~chum salmon were given high- est pri ority fo 11 owed by sockeye ~chimook ~coho and pi nk salmon (Section 2.1(d)). .Winter Flow Regime (November-April) The winter flow regime will be reduced during fill ing flow regimes and sustantially increased during opera- tion of both project stages.Primary species/l ife stages impacted by the mod ifi ed wi nter flows woul d be (in order of sensitivity):incubating salmon embryos (all species),overwintering salmon juveniles and over- wintering resident species (all 1 ife stages).Average monthly flows during filling of Watana reservoir from about 90 percent of the pre-proj ect average for March at Gold Creek to 38 percent of -the pre-project average in November (Table E.3.17).Since only minor reduc- tions in March,the low-flow month~impacts are expected to be minor. During operation~the winter releases are substantially increased to provide power during the high demand winter seasons.The increased winter flows are largest during the two dam stages,when increases above the normal average monthl y flow ranges from about 269 per- cent at Gold Creek in November to about 750 percent in February and March (TableE.3.27).The increased flows E-3-130 ------------------------------- percent percent during will increase the available overwintering habitat down- stream for salmon juvenil es and all 1 ife stages of resident species.The slough habitat for the incubat- ing salmon embryos may be enhanced through increased intergravel flow associated with the larger flows,or it may be degraded if the higher flows substantially alter the intergravel temperature regime or ice condi- tions.These and other potential impacts to slough habitats are the subject of ongoing studies . .Spring Flow Regime (May-June) The spring flow regime will be reduced below the pre- project flows for all post-project regimes.Average post-project flows at Gold Creek in May will be 45 per- cent of pre-project flows during Watana fill ing,79 percent of pre-project flows during Watana operation and 66 percent pre-proj ect flows dur i ng Watan a/Dev i1 Canyon operation. Average post-proj ect flows in June wi 11 be 22 of pre-project flows during Watana filling,41 during Watana operation and 46 percent Watana/Devil Canyon operation. During project operation,the post-project flows will nearly equal the normal preproject flows for a short time in late April or early Mayas the post-project flow regime passes from a condition of winter flow augmentation to summer flow reduction.Breakup flood flows are reduced in the regulated flow regimes. The primary species/life stage that would be impacted during spring flows are salmon fry.It is hypothesized that the spring breakup flows may induce salmon fry, particul arly chum and pink salmon,to move out of the sloughs,and other incubation gravels,and begin the process of outmigration.During the 1982 spring flood, considerabl e mainstem ice jamming was observed,re- sulting in increased stage in the side channel sand sloughs.Fry were observed to vacate the sloughs as the river stage dropped.Operational flows would reduce the magnitude of the spri ng flows such that sloughs would not be overtopped.If the sloughs are not overtopped,fry may not be exposed to the trig- gering stimulus needed to initiate outmigration.The effects of spring breakup on fry migration during the 1983 spring breakup period will be evaluated to 1)test the hypothes is that the breakup flood is important to fry outmigration;and 2)identify the magnitude of flow that will provide the proper conditions for fry E-3-131 - - .... outmigration.If the 1983 studies indicate that a spring flood is necessary for outmigration,this infor- mation will form the basis for modifying the spring release schedule to provide a sufficient stimulus.The effectiveness of these releases will be evaluated dur- i ng the fill ing and operational monitori ng stud ies • .Summer Flow Regime (July -October) The five species of Pacific salmon enter the spawning areas during the summer high flow periods.Most of the spawning in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach is con- fined to sloughs and tributaries.Access to the slough spawning areas is apparently provided by a combination of the high summer flows in the Susitna River mainstem and the summer surface inflow to the sloughs.In add i- tion,the useable spawning area in sloughs is at least partly controlled by backwater levels from the mainstem into sloughs.Upwelling groundwater in the sloughs attracts adults,maintains the permeabil ity of spawning gravels and provides a stable winter flow during the embryo incubation period.The primary species/life stage that woul d be impacted in the summer is adult chum salmon. The summer flow reg ime wi 11 be lower dur ing fi 11 i ng and operation than the natural regime.This permits for fill ing the reservoir during the season of high flow and low power demand.The greatest reductions will be during the fill ing operation,with post-project flows at Go 1d Creek reduced to 27 percent of pre-proj ect flows in July nad 70 percent in September (Table E.3.17.A smaller change is anticipated during project operation,ranging from a 66 percent reduction in July to a 38 percent increase in October (Tables E.2.24 and E.3.27. The proposed operational flows from July 25 to September (described in Chapter 2)would provide 12,000 cfs at Gold Creek,and will neither avoid nor minimize impacts to spawning salmon.It is anticipated that adult salmon will experience difficulty in gaining access to the sloughs.The flows are of sufficient magnitude,however,to undertake to rectifying impacts to salmon spawning activity by modifying·existing spawning habitat to maintain natural spawning by salmon.Rectifying measures are discussed below. £-3-132 -Rectification of Impact ·Winter Flows Since minimal impacts are expected during both filling and oper at i on a1 wi nt er flow,rect ifyi ng measures are not needed. ·Spring Flows If salmon fry require a high breakup flow in order to successfully outmigrate,a properly timed flow of sufficient level will be proivded to minimize impacts. Rectifying measures will not be needed. ·Summer Flows Impacts to salmon spawning areas cannot be eliminated at the proposed project flows.The method selected for rectification is to physically modify the geometry of the sloughs to restore their suitability as spawning and incubation habitat.Because such slough modifica- tions have not previously been attempted in Alaska,a demonstration project to examine the feasibility of slough modification program is scheduled to be initiated in the summer 1983 field season. The goals of slough modification area:1)to maintain or enhance ground water flow;2)to provide a water depth that wi 11 permit access and spawning;and 3)to maintain or enhance permeable spawning gravels.These goals will be met by:1)selecting a site that can provide sufficient ground water flow to support salmon embryos through the winter,2)providing upstream control works that will allow control of mainstem flow entering the slough;and 3)constructing downstream control works to allow access by adults and maintain a suitable depth of water over suitable substrate for spawning.Elements of this slough modification program are illustrated in Figure E.3.9. -Reduction of Impacts Over Time Post-operational monitoring will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures (see Section 2.6).If further impact reduct i on is requi red to mai n- tain existing fish populations,additional mitigation measures will be incorporated.Certain target mitigation issues will receive priority in the monitoring program. These include monitoring fry outmigation and the effects of summer project flows on adult salmon movements.The outmigration of salmon fry will be monitored to evaluate E-3-133 - ...., - -i - .... -. .- - if the proper timing of outmigration is achieved.The basis for such an evaluation will be the baseline outmigration studies and Mithin year comparison to adjacent unregulated systems.If there are significant differences in the timing of fry outmigration and these differences are related to flow levels,an adjustment of the spri ng breakup flow wi 11 be made to provi de a properly timed outmigration to reduce the impact. Monitoring will be conducted to evalute if the summer base flow achieved the intended level of mitigation.The monitoring study will include documentation of adult migration rates,access to slough spawning habitats,and embryo survival.If natural production cannot be main- tained in the sloughs with the proposed flows,then it will be necessary to alter the flow schedule to achieve the proper flow.If such flows are not feasible,then selected sloughs will be modified to increase their suit- abi lity as salmon spawning and incubation habitat.The production of these modified sloughs will be monitored to measure the success of these modifications,including studies of access,available spawning habitat and incuba- t i on success.Peri odi c mai ntenance of spawni ng gravels and flow control structure inspection will be required to ensure that the modifi ed sloughs are adequatel y functi on- ing.The maintenance schedule will be determined based upon the results of the slough modification demonstration project and ongoing monitoring studies. -Compensation For Impacts If the flow-related impacts cannot be minimized,recti- fied or adequately reduced with the implemented mitiga- tion measures,it may be necessary to compensate for the lost fi shery resources.Compensation for lost salmon productivity will consist of:1)channel modifications in side-channel and mainstem areas to increase the suit- ability of these habitats for spawning and 2)providing spawning channels in areas of groundwater upwelling or in association with clearwater tributaries . The lack of suitable substrate may limit the availability of spawni ng habi tat under project operat ion.In areas with suitable hydraulic conditions,the addition of gravels or the cleansing of gravels in areas with suit- ably sized particles will provide additional habitat required to accommodate adults displaced from other habitats. Some of the existing side channels have substrates suit- ably sized for spawning,but the particles are cemented together by glacial silts and sands.The heavy sediment E-3-134 load and peak flows that presently exist in the Susitna River have resulted in a high degree of compaction in the substrate.If the sands and si lts cementing the gravels together are removed,these areas may provide suitable spawning habitats.In some of these side-channels it may be suffi ci ent to create a mechani cal di sturbance that would allow the streamflow to remove the silts and sands. It may be possible to use a bulldozer with a scarifier to rake the streambed and stir up the fine sediments (Trihey 1982b),allowing the fines to be carried away by the streamflow.This excavation would be accomplished during reservoir filling.During filling there will be a reduction of the suspended sediment load and flood peaks (Chapter 2),which will be beneficial in maintaining these areas after cleaning.A higher flow released for one week during the spring would assist in removing the fines from these areas. In other areas where the above technique would not work, a mobile gravel cleaning machine could be required to remove si lts and sands from the substrates."Gravel Gertie ll developed by Washington State University may be suitable for use on slough substrate.The "Gravel Gertie"is a mobile gravel cleaner that uses high velo- city water jets to flush and then collect the silts from gravels for disposal (Mih 1980).Silts and sands removed from the gravels could be discharged into the mainstem river or disposed of on land.Habitat improvement acti- vities on side channels would be conducted in a down- stream sequence to reduce the chance of sedimentation of fines from upstream sites impacting downstream sites. Side channels and mainstem sites may have suitable hy- draulic conditions for spawning under project operation, but the streambed may not have substrate of appropri ate particle size for spawning.The addition of gravels may be requi ed to create spaw"ni ng habitat.Under project operation,the peak flow events will be significantly reduced in the reach from Talkeetna to Devi 1 Canyon (Chapter 2).Thus,gravels could be placed in the side channels and mainstem to create stable spawning habitat (Fi g ure 3.10). Adding appropriately sized gravel to side channels will probably be more effective for pink,chinook and possibly sockeye than for chum.Spawning chum salmon apparently select areas with upwelling ground water.Cleaning and supplementing spawning gravel cannot be implemented until reservoi r fi lli ng.Material added to the mai nstem and many of the side channels prior to the controll of flow would be quickly redi stributed during summer floods.A survey of candidate areas is being conducted to identify potential sites. E-3-135 - ~I ~I - - "\ "- - - (i i ) The size of a spawning bed and amount of spawning gravel needed would be determined by physical conditions at each selected site.A pilot project w"ill be undertaken prior to full scale implementation. Hab itat enhancement as described above woul d prov ide a spawning channel simil ar to that illustrated in Figure E.3.11 which depends on the natural flows at the channel site. If alternative mitigation schemes prove to be unfeasible, a hatchery could be developed. Mitigation of Downstream Impacts Associated With Altered Water Temperature Regime -Impact Issue The creation of Watana and Devil Canyon reservoirs would change the downstream temperature regime of the Susitna River.Reservoirs act as heat si nks,generall y reduc ing the annual variability and the rate of change in water temperatures by moderating summer and winter temperatures and introducing a time 1ago The magnitude of change in the thermal regime downstream depends on the thermal stratification of the reservoir and the design of the power intake and release structures. Some seasonal stratification is expected to occur in Watana Reservoir (Figure E2.91).Reservoir thermal modell ing ind icates that surface water temperatures may reach 10°C by August 1 and that the top 100 ft.of the water column will range between 8-goC (Chapter 2). The water temperatures downstream of the dam are set in part by the elevation of the intake structures,which in- turn determine the temperature ofthe.water drawn from the reservoir.Since growth rate in mJY aquatic organ- i sms is temperature-dependent,changes .'the thermal regime can have profound impacts on aq,ic communities. Potential adverse effects of higher w":,t~r temperatures include acceleration of incubation and larly emergence of salmonid embryos and benthic inverteb1tes.The impact of lower summer temp.eratures inclUdel..•.'.,.'.slowergr.Dwth of invertebrates,juvenile anadromous a~resident fish. The 1 ag effect may cause del ayed spri!f1g spawning acti- vity.Changes in the thermal characte,#and its effects will decrease downstream as tributariesicontribute to the flow and as the temperature regime approaches an equili- brium state.The impacts rel ated to the thermal changes are expected to be confined to the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Reach. E-3-136 -Measures to Avoid Impacts The only mitigative alternative that would completely avoid temperature changes downstream of the project is the No Project alternative.Hydroelectric project in- volving reservoir storage dams will alter the natural temperature regime. -Measures to Minimize Impacts •Water Temperatrues during Filling Watana Reservoir Summer water temperatures dur i ng the second year of fill ing Watana Reservoir are expected to range from 5 to 6"C in the reach above Talkeetna.The diversion tunnel functions as a low-level release and affords no temperature control.Water wi 11 be pull ed from depths greater than 425 ft where water temperatures are ex- pected to be near 4"C.The low water temperatures are expected to adversely affect adult salmon,and resident and juvenile fish.Adult salmon may avoid the Susitna River above Talkeetna and juvenile anadrombus and resident fish may be displaced to warmer areas or be subjected to reduced growth. Adverse impacts assoc i ated with fill ing Watana Reser- voir could be mitigated by providng a temperature con- trol structure.A low-level portal could be installed in the multi pl e 1evel outlet structure proposed for project operation.The additional portal would allow withdrawal of warmer water from the upper layer of the reservoir during the second year of filling.With the addition of the fifth portal,summer temperatures under both filling and operation are expected to be near pre- project level s (8 to lO"e). •Water Temperatures During Operation f Watana Reservoir he impacts associ ated with alteration of the tempera- •ure regime during reservoir operation can be minimized incorporating multiple level gates in the power take.Multiple level intakes have been successful in eventing temperature regulation by the selection of :scharge water from various depths (Nelson,Horak,and son 1978). ,e success of a multipl e-level intake depends on the hermal structure of the reservoir,the ex i stence of sufficient water at the desired temperature and loca- tion within the reservoir and intake ports located at the desired elevations.In the summer months, E-3-137 '"'"' ~I ~, - ,- - - - preproject temperatures range.from 8-12°C in the Ta 1keetna to Dev i1 Canyon reach.Temperatures near thi s range may exist in the top 100 feet of the reservoir (Chapter 2).If thi slayer is present,it can be accessed by the multi p1 e-1 eve1 intake gates,and impacts could be essentially avoided during the summer. During the winter months,temperatures in the mainstem are near DoC in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach. Water temperatures near 2°C are likely to occur in Watana Reservoir to a depth of 100 feet.Water temperatures of 2°C released from Watana Dam are expected to cool to near DOC by RM 148 just below Devil Canyon. -Measures to Rectify Impacts The most significant adverse impact associated with the altered thermal regime would be accelerated incubation and early emergence of salmon fry.The major concerns are re1 ated to the potenti a1 lack of food items in 1ate winter/early spring and the colder temperatures en- countered in the lower river and Cook Inlet.The modi- fied sloughs or spawning channels designed to rectify or compensate for lost spawning and incubating habitat will be provided with a rearing pond at their down- stream end.These rearing ponds will be used to collect the early emergents and hold them to prevent their downstream migration into colder water.Fry will be maintained in these rearing areas until appropriate conditions,'including temperatures,are reached in downstream hab itats.Fry emerg ing from other spawn ing habitats would not benefit from these facilities. (iii)Mitigation of Inundation Impacts On Mai nstem and Tri butary Habitats -Impact Issue The Watana Reservoir will inundate those portions of the Susitna River and its tributaries between Elevation 1480 and 2185 feet ...Th is corresponds to a loss of 54 mi of mainstem habitat and approximately 28 mi of tributary habitat.In 1981,the Arctic gray1 ing popu1 ation in the impoundment area was estimated to be approximately 10,000 gray1 ing greater than 6 inches (ADF&G 1982a).Th is popu- lation uses the clearwater tributaries as spawning and rearing habitat and the tributaries and Susitna River mainstemas overw.intering habitat.i";;"GQ,)",l,t,,1nui ng studies are being conducted to measure the amount""ff:r spawning and reari ng hab itat that wi 11 be inund ated and assess poten- ti a1 a1 ternative habitat above the impoundment area that will be made available by raising the water level.Over- wintering habitat wi 11 increase under the proposed proj ect. E-3-138 A major project impact will be the loss of grayling spawning habitat in the tributaries.During the spawning period the water level in the impoundment will be at its lowest level,with average annual drawdown at 105 feet. This substrate will subsequently be inundated by the rising reservoir water as the impoundment fills.If,the grayling spawn in areas that are inundated prior to the hatching,the embryos will likely be covered with silt and suffocate.The significance of this loss to the post-project grayling population will depend on the pro- portion of grayling spawning within the portion of the draw-down zone that will be inundated prior to hatching. -Measures to Avoid Impacts The only mitigation alternative that will avoid impound- ment impacts for the proposed project is the No Project alternative. -Measures to Minimize Impacts Mitigation measure that would substantially mlnlmlze impoundment impacts would be to substantially lower the surface elevation of the reservoiror to maintain surface level during the incubation period.Neither measure would be feasible. -Measures to Rect i fy Impacts Since the impoundment is essentially a permanent impact, rectification measures are not feasible.Rectifying measures,such as providing replacement grayling spawning habitat within the impoundment are not considered feas- ible because of the timing and magnitude of the drawdown cyc leo -Reduction of Impacts Impacts cannot be reduced over time since no effective mitigation measures have been identified. -Compensation For Impacts Since effective mitigative measures to avoid,mlnlmlZe, rectify or reduce impacts to the grayling population in the impoundment area are not available,it will be ne- c es ensate for the loss of these grayl i ng. '"_....~-' .ese-grayl i ng can be'--PTanle in certain lakes in the project area that are presently devoid of fish.Lakes will be chosen that contain suit- able grayling habitat.The number of grayling to be E-3-139 fI/IIiiiF> I - - - -.. I - ""'" - "..,. (iv) planted and number of 1akes to receive·grayl ing wi 11 be determined based on th~carrying capacity of the selected lakes.Sufficient grayling will be planted such the num- ber of catchable grayling will be similar to that number lost.If suitable habitat does not exist in the vicinity of the impoundment to support the humber of lost gray- ling,suitable areas outside the project area will be selected for stocking grayl ing.The lakes to be stocked will be selected in consultation with ADF&G,USFWS,and BLM.Preference will be g iv en to areas near the proj ect area that currently support high levels of harvest pressure. Mitigation of Downstream Impacts Associated with Nitrogen Supersaturation -Impact Issue Ni trogen supersaturat i on in outflow waters has caused significant fish mortalities from gas bubble disease. Water passing over a high spillway into a deep plunge pool entrains air.Nitrogen passes into solution at depth and a state of supersturation exists when the water returns to the surface caus i ng supersaturat i on.The degree to which this occurs depends on the depth of the pl unge pool,height of the spillway,amount of water being spi 11 ed,and downstream turbulence.Supersaturated water is unstable and over time will return to equi- librium levels if exposed to the air.However,travel time downstream during high flow periods can be fairly short,causing supersaturation to extend considerable distances downstream. -Measures to Avoid Impacts Gas supersaturation will be avoided by including fixed- cone valves in the outlet facil ities.These valves,in combination with the powerhouse flows,will discharge all flood flows up to the 1 in 50 year flood without causing supersaturation.A prototype test of Howell-Bunger valves showed them to be effective in preventing gas supersaturation (Ecological Analysts Inc.1982). -Measures to Minimize Impacts The likelihood of creating gas supersaturation downstream from the dam can bereduced by minimizing,release through 'reservoir rrranagemenLReleases oC,cur 'when the reservoir is full and inflow exceeds outflow.By holding the reservoir below full pool for most of the year flood control capacity waul d be increased,thus,decreasing the probabil ity of spills.However,the reservoir must reach £-3-140 max imum storage 1evel by September 30 to meet wi nter power demands.Storms do occur in the Susitna drainage that may require release of water;however,the struc- tures and operation criteria have been designed to mini- mize releases and spills. Spillage deflectors have been successful in reducing supersaturation in the Columbia basin (Nelson,Horak and 01 son 1976).These defl ectorscons i st of concrete si 11 s pl aced near the base of the spi 11 way that defl ect the flow horizontally into the stilling basin,thus prevent- ing air entrainment and plunging action. (c)Cumulative Effectiveness of Mitigations (i)Construction Mitigation Through proper siting and designing of project facilities, appropriate construction practices and carefully scheduling activities as discussed in Section 2.4(a),it will be pos- sible to minimize adverse impacts to aquatic habitats re- sulting from project construction.The indirect impacts caused by increased access to harvestabl e fi sh popul at ions can be minimized during construction by restricting per- sonal vehicle use in the project area during construction, by providing workers with alternate recreational opportuni- ties,and by support i ng such harvest regul at ions as the Board of Fisheries imposes. Aquatic habitat will be altered by removing gravel from the floodplain.These impacts will be rectified by rehabili- tation practices discussed in Section 2.4(a).Where desir- able,residual habitat loss can be compensated by stocking fish in gravel pits that have been rehabil itated to support desired species.At the sites to receive compensation,the level of compensation and selection of desired species will be determined on a site-specific basis in consultation with ADF&G,USFWS,and BLM. Fuel spills and road run-off will decrease water quality in streamsdownhi 11 from proj ect road s.These impacts wi 11 be reduced over time by having a properly trained and equipped spill response team at the construction site. The construction monitoring team will identify areas where remedial actions,such as repair,real ignment or redesign, are needed. E-3-141 - - - ~, - - - - .- (ii)Operation Mitigation -Mitigations of Access and Impoundment Impacts The primary program designed to mitigate residual impacts of the access road and reservoi r is to compensate for these losses by artifically propagating grayling and introducing these grayling into suitable project and non-project area waters.The target number of grayling to be produced will be equivalent to the number lost in the impoundment and an add it i ona 1 increment to compens ate for resi dua 1 access road impacts.The pri mary areas con- sidered for planting are project-area lakes and abandoned borrow pits that are capable of supporting grayling. Where feasible,access will be provided to these stocked areas to divert harvest pressure from adjacent natural. popu1 at ions.Additi ona 1 artifi call y produced grayl i ng can be introduced into project-area streams if natural population~become depleted and population enhancement is deemed to be desirable by the ADF&G.If the carrying capacity of project-area enhancement sites is exceeded by the number of grayl i ng avail ab 1e,the excess grayl i ng will be made available for planting outside the project area.Final decisions on the distribution of residual grayling will be made in consultation with ADF&G,USFWS, and BLM. Road access to the project area will result in increased resource use.Angling pressure could be controlled by the Board of Fisheries through harvest regulation includ- ing catch limits,restrictive capture techniques (e.g., fly fishing only and single hook),and adjustments in the open season. -Mitigation for Downstream Impacts The goal of the downstream mitigation program is to pro- vi de adequate habi tat downstream from Devi 1 Canyon Dam that will minimize adverse impacts on fish resources. During the development of the mltigation program,volu- metric,temporal,physical and chemical needs of the anadromous fish resources between Ta 1keetna and Devi 1 Canyon were evaluated.At this stage of mitigation development,the parameters were consi dered separately, however,continuing studies and modeling of the inter- re 1at i onshi ps of these parameters wi 11 refi ne and quan- tify the mitigation program. E-3-142 Several project features have been incorporated into the design to avoid or reduce impacts.Fixed-cone valves are to be installed in the outlet facilities to prevent gas supersaturation.The multiple level power intake gates wi 11 a 11 ow water to be withdrawn from vari ous 1evel s of the water column over the full drawdown range.This ability to withdraw water from various levels will allow contro lover downstream temperatures duri ng peri ods of stratification if suitable temperatures are available. Continuing reservoir thermal modeling will allow an evaluation of available water temperatures throughout the year so that a detailed release plan can be developed. The release plan will need to consider both water temper- ature and volume in order to minimize impacts. The project operational flows were developed with an intent to provide a maximum flow during the summer that would not substantially affect the project economics or energy production capabilities.These operational flows will alter the physical characteristics of the sloughs, thereby reduci n9 ease of access and avai 1 ab 1e spawni ng area for adult salmon and increasing embryo mortality if the sloughs dewater or freeze after spawn;ng is com- pleted.Fry that survive may not leave the sloughs if the migration stimulus,possibly a combination of a proper temperature and flow pattern,is eliminated. Since project operational flows cannot be provided to avoid all downstream impacts,while maintaining the desired level of power generation,certain rectifying and compensating measures are proposed.The primary rectify- ing measure is to modify natural slough habitats to main- tain natural salmon spawning and fry production.The slough modification process is composed of a series of steps to rectify the loss of natural slough habitat. These steps are: Selecting a site that retains ground water flow with suitable thermal characteristics under operational flow levels.The site selection process is evaluating a number of criteri a to assess the potential for the site to prov i de suffi ci ent ground water f1 ow to mai ntai n salmon embryos through the winter and allow properly timed development • .If groundwater flow cannot be naturally maintained,the site selection will consider areas where the ground water flow can be artificially maintained (see Figure E.3.11 for conceptual plan). E-3-143 ,.... - - - - .!'i£iN - -I ,~ Providing an upstream control works that wi 11 prevent the river from entering the modified slough except at extreme high flood flows.This control maintains the integrity of the spawni ng gravels and reduces mai n- tenance costs (see Figure E.3.9 for conceptual plan). .Providing a series of removable low-level flow control structures.These structures provi de the water depth needed for free access and passage of adult salmon in the slough and provide the proper water depth for spawning (See Figure E.3.9 for conceptual plan). .Provide a fry rearing and removal area.The fry rear- i n9 area is at the downstream end of the slough and concentrates the fry for rearing.The depth of water would be gradually increased as the fry rear.The fry will be fed if natural food production is insufficient to support the number of fry present.At the desi red release time,the river stage,and depth of water in the slough,will be raised to a desired level,the control works opened,and the fry allowed to outmigrate with the receding flow level.If necessary,the up- stream control works could be opened to encourage fry to vacate the slough (See Figure E.3.9 for conceptual plan). During the summer,the modified slough will be managed to provide rearing habitat for juvenile anadromous and resident species that presently utilize sloUgh habi- tats. The size of a modified slough depends on natural site characteri sti cs,such as groundwater flow rates and si ze of natural features (i .e.,adjacent islands).The number of sloughs modified will depend on the desired level of production. In addition to slough modification,mainstem spawning beds wi 11 be provided as a compensation measure (see Figure E.3.10 for conceptual plan).Additional ma-instem and si de channel spawni ng areas wi 11 be provided by scarifying or cleaning compacted gravels. E-3-144 3 -BOTANICAL RESOURCES 3.1 -Introduction ..." - .- (a)Regional Botanical Setting Botanical resources potentially affected by the Susitna Hydro- electric project include those in the upper Susitna River Basin (above Devil Canyon),in the downstream floodplain below Devil Canyon,in transmission corridors from Wi llow to Anchorage and from Healy to Fairbanks,from Watana to the intertie,and in the i ntert ie corr i dor from Wi 11 ow to He a ly .Recent stu dies conduct ed in the upper Susitna River drainage,in the floodplain of the Susitna River downstream of Devil Canyon to Talkeetna,and in the transmission corridors describe vegetation of the region (McKendrick et al.1982,Commonwealth Assoc.1982).Unless other- wise cited,the descriptions that follow are from McKendrick et a 1.(1982). The Susitna River system drains parts of the Alaska Range to the north and parts of the Talkeetna Mountains to the south.The vegetation communities of the region are typical of those covering vast areas of Alaska and northern Canada.They include forest and shrub communities on stream floodplains,conifer and deciduous forests on canyon slopes adjacent to the floodpl ains,shrub and conifer stands and tundra on benches above the canyon slopes,and tundra at higher elevations. The floodplain downstream of Devil Canyon is nearly flat.Its predominate vegetation corrmunities are open and closed balsam pop- 1ar stands;closed tall shrub 1and is important to a lesser extent. Further upstream,spruce replaces poplar in the floodplain over- story,and low shrubs become more common in the understory. Along the east-west reaches of the river,steep canyon slopes and some adjacent areas are covered with closed spruce-hardwood forest (Viereck and Dyrness 1980).This type of vegetation is most common along rivers in the southcentral and interior regions of the state • The southeast portion of the upper Susitna watershed has extensive flat areas covered by low shrubland and woodland conifer communi- ties.The extensive fl atsin the lower Oshetna River and Lake Louise areas are spruce woodland (Viereck and Dyrness 1980). The benches bordering the east-west portion of the river,and the area around the Maclaren River,are moist tundra.This type in- cludes herbaceous meadows as well as shrub-dominated sites,both of which occur elsewhere in Alaska around the Brooks Range,on the Seward Peninsula,and near the Killuck Mountains. E-3-145 The vegetation along the lower mountains and the lower slopes of the higher mountains is classified as alpine tundra by Viereck and Dyrness (1980).Some areas mapped as rock have pioneering species growing in crevices,but the plants provided negligible ground cover.This rock habitat is common on mountains throughout Alaska.Permanent snowfields and glaciers are found in higher' regions of the watershed in the Alaska Range. Each of the transmission corridors crosses several vegetation types.The Healy-to-Fairbanks transmission corridor includes ridges,wet flatland,and rolling hills with areas of open spruce, open deci duous,mixed forest,shrub 1ands and wet tundra.The Wi 11 ow-to-Anchorage transmi ss i on corri dor passes through closed birch forest,mixed conifer-deciduous forest,wet sedge grass marshes,and open and closed spruce stands.The Wi llow-to-Healy transmi ss ion traverses a wi de vari ety of vegetat i on types,from closed spruce-hardwood forests -j n the south to tundra and shrub- 1and in the north. (b)Floristics The following floristics data are summarized from McKendrick et al.(1982)and Commonwealth Assoc.(1982),where further details may be found. (i)General In the region including the upper Susitna River Basin,the downstream floodplain,and the intertie corridor,295 vascular plant species,151 genera,and 57 families have been identified (McKendrick et al.1982)(Table E.3.W1). These workers found two hundred fifty-five species in the upper basin but only 76 downstream.Fifty-four species were found both upstream and downstream.(The downstream flora is predominantly a subset of the upper basin flora.) The plant families in the upper basin having the most speci es are Compositae (Asteraceae),Sal icaceae,Rosaceae, Gramineae (Poaceae),Cyperaceae,and Ericaceae.Within the non-vascular flora 11 genera of lichens (including at least 12 species)and seven taxa of mosses were identified in these areas. In the transmission corridor from Willow to Healy, McKendrick et al.(1982)identified 128 species of vascular plants.(Most of these species were also found in the upper Susitna River basin.)Eighteen species were found only in the corridor.No floristics work had been done in the Wi 1 low-to-Cook Inlet or Healy-to-Fairbanks transmission corridors. £-3-146 - - - - (i i)Range Extensions McKendrick et al.(1982)found twenty-two vascular plant speci es in the upper Susitna Ri ver basin and 9 in the floodplain downstream of Devil Canyon which were outside their reported ranges (see Hulten 1968)(Table E.3.W2),but note that the upper Susitna River drainage is not well- represented in existing plant collections,and that range extensions may be expected from any new botanical surveys in the area. I Two speci es found in the upper basi n Seneci 0 sheldonensis ·and Danthonia intermedia --represent appre- ciable range extensions.s.sheldonensis had not pre- viously been officially reported in the state except possibly in the Skagway area.D.intermedia had been reported only in locations near upper Cook Inlet and near Skagway (Hulten 1968). McKendrick et a1.(1982)found the specimen of S. sheldonensis in a mesic midgrass community in,August near upper Portage Creek.Its identity has not yet been verified.They found Danthonia intermedia in August in the grass port i on of a mosai c .of low bi rch and grass com- munities in the low shrub areas between the Maclaren River and the Denali Highway. There.are two other plant occurences of note reported by McKendrick et aL (1982).PotamaQeton robbinsii,a sub-· merged rooted aquati c,was found·1 n Watana Lake.There have been limited collections of this species in Alaska. Hulten (1968)reported it from Summit vi 11 age south of Healy and Welsh (1974)indicated that it is known from southcentral Alaska,but is evidently rare.Picea mariana, one of the most common trees found by McKendrick et al. (1982)in the upper Susitna Basin,has been reported by Hulten (1968)to be in areas north and south of the upper Susitna River drainage,but not in the drainage.Viereck and Little (1972),however,did include the Susitna drainage in their distribution map of this plant. Most other range extensi ons reported by McKendri ck et a 1. (1982)in the upper basin are less noteworthy.Most are extensions to the north (more inland)from their previous observations.For example,P1atanthera dilatata had previously been fo~nd only near the coast in Alaska. Platanthera hyperborea.and Myrica~.extensions include sites between areas that were prev~y included in their ranges.Potentilla biflora and Pedicularis kanei Durand kanei extensions were south of their previously reported ranges. E-3-147 In the downstream floodpl ai n,McKendrick et al.(1982) found nine species outside their ranges as reported by Hulten (1968)(Table E.3.W2).One of these,raspberry (Rubus i daeus),though not reported to extend into the region by Hulten (1968),was reported by Viereck and Little (1972)to occur there.Devil's club (Echinopanax horridum) represents a sl ight range extension upriver.Small-fruit bullrush (Scirpus microcarpus)had been found only in four areas outside southeast Al aska.A specimen which appeared to be Arnica chamissonis (needs to be verified)represented a large extension from the Alaska Peninsula and southeast Alaska.The presence of enchanter I s ni ghtshade (Circaea alpina)was an extension inland from the coastal regions. Sweet-scented bedstraw (Galium triflorum)and thinleaf alder were mi nor extens ions and baneberry (Actaea rubra) and northern b1ackcurrant (R i bes hudsoni anum)were extensions from the surrounding areas into the basin. It shou 1d be re-emphas i zed that many of the range exten- s ion s reported above are merely th e resu lt of more i nten- sive botanical collections by McKendrick et al.(1982)than had been made previously,and do not represent pl ants growing in unexpected environments. (c)Threatened or Endangered Species At present,no plant species are officially listed for Alaska by Federal or state authorities as endangered or threatened;however, 37 species are currently under review by the U.S.Fish and Wild- life Service (USDI 1980b)for possible protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.Murray (1980)discusses the habi- tats,distributions,and key traits of most of these species. Searches for these species have recently been made in two areas -- the upper Susitna River basin (McKendrick et al.1982)and the intertie transmission corridor between Willow and Healy (Common- wealth Assoc.1982). (i)Upper Susitna River Basin Table E.3.W3 contains the pl ants in Murray·s (1980)1ist believed most likely to occur in the Susitna River drainage and in the landscape to be modified by the construction of the proposed dams and associated facilities.McKendrick et al.(1982)and/or Commonwealth Assoc.(1982)searched for these in the following areas of the upper Susitna basin: 1)alpine areas near the Susinta and West Fork Glaciers; 2)lowlands of the upper basin,including Maclaren and Tyone Rivers and associated ridges,terraces,and periglacial features;3)calcareous outcrops and promontories along the Susitna River near Watana Creek and Kosina Creek;4)alternative access routes in the upper basin;and 5)Borrow Site A.Aerial and ground reconnaissance were made in summer in these areas by three to four botanists and agronomists. E-3-148 - - - - - - - -, ..... - - (i 1) (ii 1) We ll-drai ned rocky Of"sCree slopes were searched ina 1pi ne areas in the upper drainage basin in the steep valleys adj acent to the Susitna and West Fork Gl aci ers.None of the species under review was found. Well-drained,sandy and gravely ridges and terraces in lowlands in the upper drainage basin were searched.Shores of lakes and ox-bow ponds,and peri-glacial features were commonly examined.A trip was made downstream as far as Devil Canyon and two large gravel bars within the riverbed were surveyed.None of the species under review were found in these lowland surveys. Several of the species being sought were known calciphiles (plants that habitually grow on calcareous soils).Three calcareous areas were found.One was on the northwest flank of Mt.Watana at about 1128 m in elevation,one was on the south side of the Susitna River immediately east of its confluence with Kosina Creek,and the third was on the north side of the Susitna River about 7 km west of Watana Creek.Calciphilic plants were found on two of these sites,but none of those found were in the threatened or endangered categories. Three sites judged by substrate characteri sties to poten- tially support rare plants were searched along the proposed northern access route.One site was a sandy blowout area on the northwest side of Deadman Mountain;one was a series of dry ridges (probably glacial moraines or terraces)on the south side of Deadman Mountain;and one was an area of windblown ridges on the east side of Deadman Mountain.No threatened or endangered species were found at any of these sites,nor along any of the other proposed access corridors. The vegetation in the vicinity of Borrow Site A was sur- veyed in Ju ly 1981.No threatened or endangered speci es were found. Willow-to-Healy Intertie The Willow-to-Healy Intertie transmission corridor was checked for the presence of Smelowskia borealis var. vi llosa,Taraxacum carneoco loratum,Mont i a bostochi i and Lysimachia ciliata.Geologic and topographic maps were used to pick out potential habitats for the species. Several habi tats selected were checked,but none of the plants in questions was found (Commonwealth Assoc.1982). Summary In summary,the upper Susitna River basin was surveyed in selected habitat sites for species under consideration for E-3-149 threatened or endangered status.Access routes,Borrow Si te A,and the Wi 1 low-Healy transmi ssi on corri dor were a1so surveyed for the presence of these speci es.None of the species collected has been identified to be one of the 1i sted threatened and endangered speci es. No endangered species work has been conducted in the down- stream area or the transmission corridors from Healy to Fairbanks and Wi llow to Anchorage.The changes in water flow due to the project are judged unlikely to negatively affect any endangered speci es because none of them (Tab 1e E.3.W3)is normally found on unstable,shifting river banks. (d)Contribution to Wildlife,Recreation,Subsistence and Commerce In the project area,the importance of botanical resources to people lie mainly in the contribution of plants to wildlife food and habitat,human recreational and subsistence use.Mitigation for losses of botanical resources wi 11 be concerned mainly with maintaining the existing potential of the botanical resources to support these uses. (i)Wildlife The structure of botanical communities in the Susitna pro- ject area directly influences the area's recreational potential.For example,hiking,skiing,horseback travel, and travel by off-road vehicles (DRV)is more difficult in some vegetative types than in others.Open terrain (tundra,open forests,etc.)is preferred for such travel. Scenic attractiveness is greatly influenced by vegetation community composition and distribution.Diversity in vege- tation structure across the landscape enhances the attrac- tlveness of the landscape to recreational users.The Susitna basin has an aesthetlcal1y pleasing interspersion E-3-150 - - ,.,.., of vegetation types.The Scenic composite is enhanced by color contrast,particularly in autumn when gold and russet deciduous leaves contrast to the dark green of spruce. The most important effects of vegetation on recreation may be indirect,in that wild game populations sought by hunters are more abundant in some vegetati ve types than in others.Hunting is an impprtant recreational use of land in the Susi tna project area,and hunters prefer to hunt where veget at ion ch aracteri st i cs improve the ease of acqui ri ng game. (iii)Subsistence The importance of vegetation to subsistence in the Susitna project area appears to be minimal because most of the area is relatively remote from human settlement.It is likely that the greatest i nf1 uence of vegetat i on on subsi stence is,as with recreational use,in its quality as habitat for game taken for subsistence use (caribou,moose,etc.). Some subsistence berry picking is reported. - I~ - (i v)Commerce Historically,there has been negligible use of plant resources at a commercial level in the project area (see ADNR 1982:36).The forestry potential for most of the region is very low because stands of merchantable timber are not abundant and access is difficult.Areas within several km of the Susitna Ri ver itself are the only p1 aces forestry potential is considered high (ADNR 1982:37). 3.2 -Baseline Description High-altitude (U-2)color infrared photographs,LANDSAT imagery,and subsequent ground-truthing were used by McKendrick et al.(198.2)to map the vegetation in the Susitna project area.These workers clas- sifi ed vegetation according to the system presented by Viereck and Dyrness (1980).They mapped the enti re Upper Susitna Ri ver Basi n (Figure E.3.W1)at a scale of 1:250,000 and the transmission corridors and upper basi n withi n 16 km of the Susitna Ri ver at a scale of 1:63,360.They mapped areas in impoundments,within 0.8 km of impoundments,in the floodplain from Portage Creek to Talkeetna,and in borrow sites at a scale of 1:24,000. In each vegetation/habitat type in the Upper Susitna Basin and in the floodplain below Devil Canyon,measures of species composition and community structure were made by McKendrick et a1.(1982).Data on elevation,slope,aspect and landform also were gathered to relate to species composition of the vegetation. E-3-151 These authors estimated canopy cover of each plant species in each layer of vegetation.They defined "ground layer"to be all herbaceous species and woody species less than 0.5 m tall.The "s hrub 1ayer U included woody species taller than 0.5 m but less than 2.5 cm dbh (diameter breast height).The "un derstory layer"consisted of woody species between 2.5 cmand 10.0 cm dbh.1t0verstory"vegetation con- tained species larger than 10.0 cm dbh.This classification scheme will be used herein to describe the vertical layering within plant communities in the project area. (a)Watana Reservoir Area Forest,tundra,and shrubland are the basic vegetation types found in the Susitna Ri ver watershed above Watana Dam.Forest com- mun it i es are defi ned as those with at 1east 10%cover by tree species regardless of the trees·heights.Shrubland comunities have at least 25%cover of erect to decumbent shrubs but are not located beyond the elevational limit of trees.Tundra stands are those communities above or beyond the elevational limit of trees and are dominated by shrub or herbaceous species.These pl ant communities are widespread throughout Al aska and northern Canada. The structure and distribution of vegetation types below tundra in this area are strongly influenced by past fires,evidenced by fire scars on the trees.Post-fire succession for bl ack spruce stands typically proceeds from the initial herbaceous and shrubby stages to young black spruce stands to dense and finally decadent black spruce/moss communities (Van Cleve and Viereck 1981).Post- fire succession in white spruce stands includes the initial herb and tree seedl ing stage,the shrub-tree sapl ing stage,and the dense hardwood stage of aspen,birch,or a mixture of aspen and birch.From this point the stand proceeds through a mature hardwood-spruce seedling stage,'a mixed white spruce-hardwood stage,and finally a mature white spruce stage (Van Cleve and Vi ereck 1981).Most of the herbaceous,shrubby,deci duous,and mixed forest communities identified and described below may be successional stages in the process of transition to black or white spruce forest. Figure E.3.W1 illustrates the general overall distribution of vegetation in the upper Susitna River basin,and Table E.3.W4 gives the percentages of cover by each type in the Watana Reservoir area.The principal types are spruce forests;tundra; tall and low shrublands;herbaceous;unvegetated areas;and wet 1ands. (i)Forests Forest vegetation types are located at the lower elevations of the upper basin (Figure E.3.W1).The average elevation of forest areas sampled by McKendrick et al.(1982)was 523 m. E-3-1S2 - -. ,..,. - -. - - .- -, - ..... .... - .- Forests were divided into subtypes according to the domi- nant trees (conifer,deciduous,or mixed)."Deciduous"and uconifer ll types had at least 75%of the tree cover provided by either deciduous or coniferous trees,respectively. uMixed types ll had lesser percentages of each . Each forest subtype was further classed as "woodlands,u "open,1l or "clos~d,"depending on percent tree canopy cover.The "woo dland type ll stands contained between 10% and 25%tree cover.nOpen "stands contained 25%to 50% tree cover,and uclos ed"stands had over 50%tree cover. Forested communiti es in the Watana Reservoir area are simi- 1ar to those descri bed by Vi ereck (1975).Bl ack spruce generally occurs in wetter sites than white spruce,and spruce occurs on colder sites than do deci duous or mi xed forests.Deciduous and mixed forest stands are usually earl i er successi onal stages of the coni fer stands (Vi ereck 1970,1975;Hettinger and Janz 1974).Closed forests occur on warmer sites than do open forests. -Spruce Forest Spruce stands are dominated by either white spruce (Picea glauca)or black spruce (Picea mariana).These forests contain a well-developed ground layer with a high percent cover (Tabl es E.3.W5 -E.3.W8).The 1ayeri ng structure of black and white spruce stands is similar,except that white spruce stands usually have a greater overstory cover (Tables E.3.W6 and E.3.W7). A few cores of 1arge trees taken by McKendrick et al. (1982)indicated that large white spruce ranged from 34 to 78 years in age and large black spruce from 77 to 171 years old.Several white spruce stands examined appeared to be recovering from past di sturbance,perhaps fire; black spruce stands appeared less recently disturbed. Open spruce stands are usually found on slopes or fl at- lands along the rivers at elevations averaging 487 m. The cover of the white spruce trees is concentrated in the overstory 1 ayer,but most of the bl ack spruce tree cover is contained in the shrub layer (Tables E.3.W6 and E.3.W7).Canopy cover of the ground layer of vegetation in the open spruce forests normally exceeds that of the trees themselves.Black spruce stands contain low shrubs,such as crowberry (Empetrum nigrum),northern Labrador tea (Ledum decumbens),bog bl ueberry (Vacci ni um uliginosumL and mountain cranberry (V.vitisidaea)in the ground 1ayer.Pri ckly rose (Rosa ae;cul ari s)and b 1uejoi nt (Cal ama1rosti s canadensTS)are the IllOSt important ground ayer species in open white spruce stands (Tables E.3.W6 and E.3.W7). £-3-153 Cover of feather mosses in open stands of both black and white spruce approximates that of the trees.Low shrubs, such as crowberry,northern Labrador tea,bog blueberry, and mountain cranberry account for much of the woody ground layer.Important herbaceous species include blue- joint and horsetails (Equisetum spp.)(Tables E.3.W6 and E.3.W7)• All woodland spruce stands surveyed by McKendrick et al. (1982)were black spruce.Unlike open spruce stands, woodl and stands are composed of scattered,stuned trees, and the overstory is almost negligible (Table E.3.W8). This vegetation type is usually found on the relatively level benches where soils are poorly drained.The trees are usually too small to qualify for the overstory layer because trunks are <10 cm dbh.In these woodland stands, sphagnum mosses,not feather mosses,are the most important cover species;important ground 1ayer species include sedges (Carex spp.),woodland horsetail,and low shrubs similar to those found in the open spruce stands (Table E.3.W8). -Deciduous Forests McKendrick et al.(1982)found that balsam popl ar (Populus balsamifera),paper birch (Betula papyrifera) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)stan.ds comprise the deciduous overstory vegetation of the Susitna basin. These stands usually have a greater overstory cover than spruce stands,because individual deciduous trees produce more foliage cover than do individual conifer trees. Deciduous forests are restricted mostly to the steep, often south-facing slopes and floodplain banks along the river (Figure E.3.W1).Elevations average 582 m,with closed stands occurring at average elevations of 560 m and open stands at 625 m. Deciduous forests have an especially well-developed ground 1ayer.I mport ant woody spec i es in t he ground layer include crowberry,northern Labrador tea,bog blue- berry,and mountai n cranberry.Open stands appear to h ave more woody cover in the ground 1ayer th an do the closed stands,but closed stands have more herbaceous components. Balsam poplar is usually the first tree in the succes- sional stage of vegetation development on alluvial deposits.The balsam poplar trees provide about three- fourths cover in the overstory with relati ve ly unimpor- tant understory and shrub layers (Table E.3.W9). E-3-154 - - - - """' - - Closed paper birch stands occur on steep,usually south- facing slopes that have typically been subjected to recent di sturbance as descri bed by Hetti nger and Janz (1974)for northeastern AI aska.The I ayer structure is similar to the closed balsam poplar stands --about three-fourths overstory cover,a we Il-deve loped ground layer,and relatively unimportant shrub and understory layers (Table E.3.WlO).Frequently the overstory has a few scattered white spruce. Trembling aspen stands are few and are generally found on the upper portions of quickly draining,dry,south-facing slopes.The general structure is similar to other closed deci duous stands in that there are we ll-deve loped overstory and ground 1 ayers,but poorly deve loped shrub and understory layers (Table E.3.W11). -Mixed Conifer-Deciduous Forest Work of McKendrick et ale (1982)shows that the mixed conifer-dec i duous vegetat i on type has average overstory cover intermediate between that for spruce stands and that for deciduous stands.This forest type is typically dominated by white spruce and and paper birch~ Elevations for mixed conifer-deciduous forests average 466 m,with closed stands having a mean elevation near 425 m and open stands occurri ng around 482 m.Most of the I arger stands are found on s lopes downstream from Tsusena Creek (Figure E.3.W1).These are successional stands which developed as spruce replaced deciduous trees. Cover in these vegetation/habitat types is almost com- plete,with a well-developed ground layer containing important amounts of bluejoint,bunchberry,woodla.nd horsetail,and Ptilium (Tables E.3.W12 and E.3.W13). Overstory cover in closed mixed stands is about 60%and that in open mixed stands is about 38%.The height of the overstory is sometimes up to 20m.Dbh1s of individuals in these two-species overstories range from 15 to 30 em. Cores from 1arger trees i ndi cate that bi rch trees in mixed stands average about 90 years old or older.Rotten centers precluded accurate aging in older birch trees. Wh ite spruce ages range from 50 to 204 years with most trees older than 100 years. Plant species composition and abundance differs between open and closed stands.The shrub layer is more important in the relatively open stands,mostly because blueberry willow (Salix novae-angliae);s more abundant there than in closed stands. E-3-155 (ii)Tundra Tundra communities usually occur above the present limit of tree growth (Figure E.3.WI).McKendrick et a1.(1982) found most of the well-vegetated communities to occur on flat to gently sloping areas.Sparser vegetation occurs on steep or rocky terrai n.Although tundra speci es composition is highly variable,four distinct subtypes occur in areas 1arge enough to map --wet sedge-grass tundra,mesic sedge-grass tundra,herbaceous alpine tundra, and closed mat and cushion tundra. Wet sedge-grass tundra communi ties occur at an average elevation of 587 m in wet,depressed areas with poor drain- age.They have almost complete vegetation cover,with most species occurring in the ground layer,but up to 10%cover in erect shrubs (Table E.3.W14).The shrub layer,when present,contains cattered individual willows (Salix spp.). There is usually a large amount of organic matter in soils of wet sedge-grass communities,and sometimes a thick organic 1ayer exi sts on top of mi nera 1 soi 1. Mesic sedge-grass tundra is prevalent at higher elevations (mean elevation =1372 m)on rolling terrain with well- drained soils.The soils are well-developed in some areas, but in others the soi 1 is interspersed wi th rocks.Vege- tation cover is usually between 50 and 75%of the area (Table E.3.WlS).All vegetation is in the ground layer and species are usually less than 30 cm tall. Two types of herbaceous alpine tundra are found in the Upper Susitna River Basin;although only one,herb-sedge, predomi nates in areas 1arge enough to map.Herb-sedge communities appear at elevations of around 1295 m,near glaciers (particularly the West Fork Glacier)on gentle, fairly well-drained slopes with relative well-develoepd soils.Vegetation cover in this type is nearly 100 percent. The other type of herbaceous a 1pi ne communi ty occurs in small,isolated rocky areas.Small forbs and sometimes shrubs grow in the pockets of mineral soil imbedded between the rocks. The fourth major type of tundra communi ty is the mat and cushion tundra,found at high elevations (1013 m)on dry, windy ridges (Figure E.3.Wl).Vegetation covers about 75% of the area and is usually less than 20 to 30 cm tall (Table E.3.W16).Lichens and low mat-forming shrubs are major constituents.Soils are shallow and coarse. E-3-156 - - - - - - (iii)Shrubland Shrubland vegetation types are the most prevalent upland vegetation types in the upper Susitna River basin. Including approximately 65 plant species,shrublands gener- ally occupy areas at higher elevations,than forest com- munities,but at lower elevations than tundra types. -Tall Shrub Types Tall shrub communities are dominated by Sitka alder (Aldus sinuata or Alnus crispa var.sinuata)and are found mostly on steep slopes above the river or sometimes above the flat benches at an average elevation of 573 m (Figure E.3.Wl).Many of these stands are 2 to 4 m in height.Approximately 25 species have been identified in the alder stands. Alder stands frequently occur as stringers through other vegetation types along the slopes by the river.Fre- quently alder exists as a ring around a mountain at a certain elevation or in a strip along a river drainage, as at Portage Creek.The closed stands have almost comp lete vegetat i on cover;the ground 1ayer and under- story account for most of the cover (Table E.3.W17). -Low Shrub Types Low shrub vegetation is common in the upper Susitna River basin.Communities are found on the extensive,rela- tively flat benches (mean elevation =781 m),where soils are frequently wet and gleyed,but usually without standing water.Community dominants are usually 1.0 to 1.5 m tall.The type is dominated by birch and willow (Tables E~3.W18 and E.3.W19). Birch shrub stands are usually dominated by resin birch (Betula glandulosa).The most important associated species in these stands is bog blueberry.Mosses and lichens also contribute to plant cover-.In some stands, there is a buildup of soil and debris around the bases of each birch shrub clump,creating a large amount of micro- relief.Sometimes the stands are dense,like a thicket; others stands have 1arge openi ngs between i ndi vi dual shrubs.Sc attered black spruce contri bute almost 10% cover in some stands. Willow stands are usually in wetter areas than are birch shrub stands.Diamondleaf willow (Salix planifolia subsp.pulchra)dominates some stands forming thickets E-3-157 along small streams at high elevations.Because of the wetness,these communities are usually less botanically diverse than birch shrub stands.Willows frequently have soil and debris built up at the bases of the stems,with standing or running water in the troughs. Species associated with willow stands in the Susitna basin are similar in some cases to those noted by Hanson (1953)in northwestern Alaska,by Hettinger and Janz (1974)in northeastern Alaska,and by Viereck (1966)near ~. Muldrow Glacier.Northern Labrador tea and bog blueberry are common. (i v)Herbaceous Two herbaceous community types are found in the upper basin.Grasslands dominated by bluejoint are present on level to sloping areas at lower elevations along the river and along the Portage Creek drainage (Figure E.3.W1). Herbaceous pioneer communit i es are present on recent 1y vegetated gravel and sand bars where soils have little organic matter and often consist of many cobbles. (v)Unvegetated Areas Three classes of unvegetated area are depicted on the maps by McKendrick et al.(1982)(Figure E.3.Wl)--water,rock, and snow and ice.Lakes and streams are included in the water category.Lakes are genera.l1y found along flat benches and range in size from small ponds to large lakes such as Big Lake (approximately 450 ha).Rock is bedrock or deposited geologic materials supporting little or no vascular vegetation.Rocks occur as outcroppings at high elevations,as steep cliffs along the river,or as unconsolidated gravel in newly deposited river bars.Snow and ice include permanent snowfields and glaciers;these are most common at the northern end of the study area in the Alaska Range,and some occur near the sourthern boundary in the Talkeetna Mountains. (vi)Wet 1 ands A summary of the dominant aquatic species and factors influencing their location in and around many of the water bodies in the Upper Susitna Basin is presented in Figure E.3.W2.Bur reed and yellow pond lily probably contribute more to total cover than do all other species combined. Yellow pond lily,a submerged species with large floating leaves,is particularly prominent and forms vast beds in several water bodies.It is absent along the edges of ponds but appears to grow best at depths rangi ng from 0.6 E-3-158 - - (b) to 2.1 m,frequently forming a band around ponds and lakes between the shallows and deep water.Bur reed,in con- trast,frequently dominates the shallows of the ponds from 0.15 to 0.60 m in depth.Horsetail,mare1s tail,and bladderwort are also common in these shallows.Horsetail is common on rocky bottoms where 1itt 1e other vegetat ion occurs.Bladderwort appears prominent in shallows having a mud bottom or a bottom of organic matter. Along the edges of water bodies,sedges probably contribute more to total cover than all other edge species combined. It is the prevalent species of the pond shallows,along the pond periphery,and also on floating mats when they are present. Watana Lake is unique in that is is dominated by pondweed (Potamogeton robbinsii),a submerged rooted aquatic species that grows in water from about 1.2 to 2.4 m in depth.The reason for the lack of other vascular plants in Watana Lake and the presence of Potamogeton robbi nsi i is not under- stood.(See 3.1(b)(ii)-Range Extension for further discussion of this plant.) Lakes and ponds with gent ly s 1opi ng substrates have more aquatic plants,both submerged and emergent s than do water bodies with steeply sloping substrates;but above 945 m in elevation,there is usually sparse aquatic vegetation cover regardless of the substrate morphology.Rocky bottoms sup- port less aquatic vegetation than do mud or sand bottoms. Floating mats of vegetation are sometimes a part of the associated emergent wetland.These mats are dominated by sedge,sphagnum moss,and common bank species. Wetlands cover large portions of the Upper Susitna River Basin,including riparian zones,ponds and lakes on upland plateaus,and wet tundra.Wetland areas of particular importance in the project area include Upper Brushkana Creek,Upper Deadman Creek,the area betwee Lower Deadman Creek and Tsusena Creek,the Fog Lakes area,the Stephan Lake area,Swimming Bear Lake,and Jack Long.Creek.Lakes and ponds have been surveyed and thei r vegetat ion char- acterized.Further studies are being conducted on the classification and mapping of wetlands. Devil Canyon Reservoir Area All of the vegetation types found in the Watana reservoir area are also found in the Devi 1 Canyon reservoir area.The Devil Canyon area has been mapped and described by McKendrick et 0.1.(1982). Table E.3.W20 gives the percentage of cover for each community type in the Devil Canyon reservoir area.Figure E,3.Wl illustrates the spatial distribution of the vegetation types. Conifer forests (3.8%of the reservoir area)are less common in the Devil Canyon reservoir area than in the Watana reservoir area. They are found mainly on the north-facing slopes of the canyon and on some of the adjacent benches. £-3-159 Deciduous (mostly birch)and mixed conifer-deciduous forests cover the south-facing slopes of the canyon and both sides of the canyon below Devil Creek~extending up into the valleys of Portage Creek and Indian River.Balsam poplar stands~found on the floodplain, cover 18%of the Devil Canyon reservoir area. Tundra vegetation occupies a large portion (41%)of the Devil Canyon reservoir area.Mountains north and south of the river rise sharply to hundreds of meters above river level.The upper areas of these mountai ns (over 975 m)are covered with mat and cushion/sedge grass vegetation. Shrubland is found on 28%of the reservoir area.Open tall shrub- land is found at elevations intermediate between forests and tun- dra.Birch and willow shrub are found on some of the upper benches. Grasslands are found along Portage Creek and in the Susitna River floodplain (Figure E.3.W1).Rock,water and ice cover 9%of the reservoir area.There is much less wetland area in the impound- ment area of the Devil Canyon Dam than in the Watana impoundment. For more detailed descriptions of the vegetation community types, percent cover,and vertical distribution of plant species,refer to Sections 3.2(a)(i-vi). (c)Talkeetna to Devil Canyon' The Susitna River from Devil Canyon to Talkeetna flows mostly through a steep canyon that opens out near Talkeetna.The flood- plain vegetation is strongly influenced by water and ice during floods.Scouring by ice and water during spring breakup and by high water during summer floods account for much of the vegetation dynamics in the floodplain. Willow and balsam poplar are common early-successional species on the floodplain of this river.They occur on the most recently- deposited river bars.As the pioneer communities mature,balsam poplar becomes dominant.The oldest,most stable areas are usually covered with birch-spruce forest. (i)Early Successional Stands Early successional conmunities account for 5-10%of the vegetated land on the floodplain.They are usually domin- ated by horsetai 1 (Equisetum)and/or dryas (Dryas drummondii)in the ground layer and balsam popular and/or wi 11 ow in the shrub layer.Characteristically,these com- munities have little total vegetation cover with greater than 50%bare gound (Table E.3.W21).Plant species in these types generally have rhizomes,or horizontal under- ground stems,which may extend for many meters and are effective in binding loose sand and silt.Dryas is import- ant in stabilizing gravelly sites. E-3-160 - - - - .- In most stands,balsam poplar and willow occur at greater densitities than other woody species,but alder has a rela- tively rapid growth rate,and it begins to overtop willow and balsam poplar withln 2 or 3 years after its establish- ment. These balsam popular and willow stands may last up to 10 years from the 1 ast major di sturbance.Agi ng of these stands is difficult because floods frequently bury several years'plant growth in silt.Balsam poplar about 50 cm in hei ght mi ght have 10 years of growth S1 nce the 1 ast major silting and another 10 years in the buried silt layer. This cycle may be repeated a number·of times before vegetation succession advances to a later stage. Vegetation on these sites is slow-growing until sufficient silts and sands are deposited by wind and water to provide a parent material for soil development. (ii)Mid-Successional Stands Mid-successional types account for about one-fifth of vege- tated land in the Susitna Basin floodplain.Deposition of sands and silts that raises the elevation of sites above the level of frequent flooding are necessary for transition of early successional vegetation to mid-successional stages.Thin1eaf alder,or balsam poplar that has developed into tall shrubs or trees,dominates these st ands ..The alder type is the fi rst phase and appears to last from 10 to 25 years after stabilization.Balsam pop1 ar appears to domi nate the vegetation 25 to 55 years after stabilization,but stands of this type are much less frequent than the alder-dominated stands.As noted earlier,alder overtops balsam poplar during the transition from ear1y-to mid-successional stands.However,after about 20 years,the balsam poplar that remains quickly doub les its hei ght,thereby overshadowi ng the alder and developing into the immature balsam poplar trees of the mid-successional stage. In both alder and balsam pop 1ar stands,there is essen- tially no bare ground.As balsam poplar assumes greater dominance,its density and that of thin1eaf alder and felt- leaf willow decline from that found in alder stands,since the balsam poplar trees become larger;but Sitka alder, prickly rose,and highbush cranberry increase in density (Table E.3.W22). E-3-161 (iii)Late Successional Stands As the balsam poplar stands of mid-succession mature,white spruce may appear in the canopy.Mature balsam poplar stands probably are establ ished by about 75 years after stabilization and exist for probably 30 more years. Eventually,balsam poplars become decadent,leaving space for development of more balsam poplar or spruce and birch, if no distrubances interrupt the process.Which factors cause development of the birch-spruce stands and which pro- mote cant i nuat i on of the ba1sam poplar are st ill unc 1ear. Mature and decadent balsam poplar stands occur on 25 to 40% of the vegetated floodplain;mixed stands of birch and spruce occupy 23 to 32%of the area.McKendrick et al. (1982)found mature and decadent balsam poplar stands to collectively average 90%total vegetation cover.They found birch-spruce communities to have 42%cover of white spruce in the overstory (Table E.3.W23). Bi rch-spruce types have the greatest vari at ion in stand structure of the vegetation types found on the floodplain. There is some evidence that these stands are self- perpetuating.Upon overmaturity,the birch overstory appears to fall,making the spruce more susceptible to wind-throw and thereby allowing a pure birch shrub-alder- highbush cranberry-prickly rose community to increase.The shrub community then progresses agai n to the bi rch-spruce forest conditions. (d)Talkeetna to Cook Inlet Vegetation in the floodplain below Talkeetna has a similar succes- sional sequence to that above Talkeetna.It consists primarily of bottomland spruce-hardwood forests (Commonwealth Assoc.1982). The islands and river bars are somewhat more stable due to the width of the floodplain,which reduces ice jam damage and the severity of flooding.This increase in stability increases the average age and successional stage of the vegetation present in the floodplain. Separate mapping of this area has not been undertaken because of the minimal impact that the project is expected to have on vege- tation below the confluence of the Susitna with the Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers (see Section 3.3). E-3-162 - - ~' - ,~J - (e)Transmission Stubs and Intertie - - .... (i)Healy to Fairbanks The class i fi cat i on system used to map the northern trans- mission corridor (McKendrick et al.1982)is the same as that used in the upper basi n (see Vi ereck and Dyrness 1980).The corridor crosses three distinct physio- graphically and phytosocio10gically distinct sections: Healy to Nenana River!Nenana River to Tanana River!and Tanana River to Fairbanks. The Hea1y-to-Nenana River section contains a dissected plateau on the west side!a relatively flat area in the middle!and the Parks Hi ghway and Nenana Ri ver to the east. Vegetation along the ridges leading from the plateau is predominantly open spruce!open mixed conifer-deciduous! and open deci duous forest types.The f1 at area is pre- dominantly low shrub with sedge-grass and open and closed spruce types.Most f the spruce trees are relatively short!except along the streams. The Tanana f1 ats area extends from just beyond the Nenana River crossing to the Tanana River.This section has a mosaic of wet vegetation types including open spruce stands with larch!low shrub!and wet sedge-grass.Locations of many types appear to be a consequence of old stream meanders and drainage patterns.Some patches of deciduous forest stands occur ..Dry streambeds have stringers of other vegetation!such as low shrub!through them. The section from the Tanana Ri ver to Fairbanks passes through rolling hills covered predominantly with open deciduous forest.Small areas of spruce are less common than in the Tanana flats section.The mixed woodland patches in this section are generally cutover areas.Many of the closed spruce areas produce very short shrub-l i ke trees or shrubs. Most spruce areas between the Tanana Ri ver and Fairbanks contain only spruce;few have larch.About half the areas in the Tanana flats section contain larch as well.Spruce (presumably black spruce)occurs in low!poorly drained areas.Spruce in better-drainage locations may be either black or white spruce but existing maps (McKendrick et al. 1982)show the vegetation only as spruce.The black spruce-larch type!confined in Alaska to the interior!is generally found only on wet 10w1 and sites with shallow permafrost (Viereck and Dyrness 1980). E-3-163 Forest types account for almost 78%of the 111,000 hectares of the corridor,with open forest types being the dominant form (Table E.3.W24).Open spruce covers 28%of the area, open deciduous 11%,and open mixed conifer-deciduous 11%. (ii)Willow to Cook Inlet The Willow-Cook Inlet transmission corridor passes through three principal kinds of plant communities --(1)closed birch and mixed conifer-deciduous forests,(2)wet sedge- grass marshes,and (3)open and closed spruce stands (Table E.3.W25)(McKendrick et al.1982). Bi rch and mi xed forests are most abundant.These forests can have high quality birch,white spruce,and balsam poplar trees.However,many sites have had poor regeneration and developed either a woodland/shrub1and or woodland/grassland aspect.Birch is the predominant deciduous species.Localized stands of balsam poplar are associated with the active river floodplain (Willow vicinity). Wet sedge-grass marsh is the second most common vegetation type in this area.Most of these areas are quite extensive and associ ated with di verse networks of ponds,1akes,and meandering streams.These areas support little other vege- tation except for scattered islands of black spruce and low shrubs on drier sites. White spruce,common in most of interior Alaska,is less common in this part of the Susitna Valley.The vegetation map of this corridor does not identify spruce to species. However,most closed and open spruce stands in areas domi nated by mi xed con i fer deci duous forest are probab 1y white spruce.Spruce stands skirting wet sedge-grass or low shrub areas may be white or black spruce or mixtures of the two.Most woodland spruce stands are black spruce. The Willow-Cook Inlet corridor includes approximately 38,000 hectares (Table E.3.W25).It passes through relatively flat terrain that is 67%forested,predominantly with conifer-deciduous forests.Approximately 24%of the area is small and large wet sedge-grass meadows. (iii)Willow to Healy The Willow-to-Healy intertie corridor is covered by i nteri or forests,muskeg,shrub communit;es and tundra. White spruce and paper bi rch domi nate the dri er forested landscapes;black spruce is primarily located on the poorly drained sites.Additionally,balsam poplar and white spruce develop on the floodplains.Within or adjacent to these areas about thirty species of willow and several E-3-164 - .... - - - - species of alder occur in the understory or in thickets with little or no overstory. The southern two-thirds of this corridor contains forested areas;the northern portion consists mainly of open wood- 1and,shrub 1and and tundra.The corri dor possesses fewer glaciers and ice fields than is common in similar sized areas in the region (Commonwealth Assoc.1982). (i v)Dams to Intertie - .- The transmission corridor from the dams to the intertie has not been separately mapped.But from work of McKendrick et ale (1982),one can see that vegetation types include tall shrub on steep embankments,open spruce forests on the slopes and benches,and mi xed and birch forests on gent 1e slopes and benches.Higher elevation types include mat and cushion tundra and sedge-shrub tundra.Areas covered by each type is presented in Table E.3.W26. 3.3 -Impacts Impacts of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project on vegetation are of two general kinds --(1)loss of all vegetative cover;and (2)change in the nature of vegetative cover (i.e.,alterations in plant community types).The first kind of impact is considered adverse;wh"ile the second kind is either adverse or beneficial depending upon its effect on wildlife.The following discussions treat both kinds of impact. (a)Watana Development (i)Construction -Vegetation Removal Construct i on of the Watana deve 1opmentwi 11 result in the direct remova~of vegetation within an area of approxi- mately 144 km.Within the dam,spi 11way,and impound- ment areas,about 12,667 ha of vegetation will be removed by construction and clearing operations.Included are 10,818 ha of forest that is composed primarily of large stands of both woodland and open black and white spruce, as well as some open mixed forest types.The camp,vil- lage,airstrip,and borrow areas will affect an addi- tional 1742 ha,most of which is shrubland or black spruce forest. Table E.3.W27 lists the area of each vegetation type to be directly removed by the Watana development,and compares each value to the total area of that vegetation type within the Upper Susitna Basin.Approximately E-3-165 of the open birch stands,and all large closed birch stands in the upper basin will be removed by the Watana development.The relative loss of other types is small when compared to their availability in the basin.For example,only 3.4%of forested areas,0.1%of tundra types,and 0.4%of shrubland cover types will be directly removed by the development. -Vegetation Loss by Erosion Erosion is a persistent problem at dam construction sites in northern 1atitudes (Baxter 1977,Baxter and Gl aude 1980).Erosion may be promoted by the following: ·Destabilization of till due to clearing of vegetation; · Blowdown of trees near cleared areas; Thawing of permafrost; ·Desiccation of exposed soils;and ·Changes in drainage patterns. Slope stability studies by Acres American (1982)indicate that areas particularly vulnerable to vegetation loss through erosional effects include side slopes of the canyon from the south abutment of the Watana Damsite to Vee Canyon,along Watana Creek,and the Oshetna-Goose Creek area.Existing vegetation patterns in these areas reflect a mosaic of disturbance and regeneration of plant cover. -Vegetation Damage by Wind and Dust Blowdown of trees is a recogni zed prob 1em inc 1eared areas (Todd 1982).Near reservoirs,it is promoted by increased wi nds due to a greater fetch as areas are cleared (Baxter and Glaude 1980,Brown 1972).Since northeasterly winds predominate in the project area most of the year,the greatest blowdown potential is on the south side of the Watana damsite near the spillway. Wi nd-generated dust is expected to be a prob 1em duri ng the construct;on phase because of the 1arge areas that will be cleared for the impoundment and borrow areas,and increased wind fetch as a result of clearing. E-3-166 """ - - - .... .... .... Accumulations of thick dust on vegetation can potentially retard snowmelt (Drake 1981).The direct effect of dust on plants varies with plant species and the chemical composi- tion of dust.For example,densities of cottongrass (Eriophorum spp.)are likely to increase,but stiff club- moss,sphagnwn moss and lichens such as Cladina apparently decrease in abundance when exposed to dust (CRREL 1980). -Effects of Altered Drainage Local alteration of drai nage patterns surface water regimes may resu lt from c1eari ng,ditchi ng,and other constructi on activities.Berms constructed on shoulders of construction areas may block drainage patterns,causing waterlogging of soils or shifts of surface flow to adjacent drainages (CRREL 1980).Resulting changes in surface water regimes will cause plant communities to shift accordingly.The time required for these changes to occur,and the extent of the change,wi 11 depend on the extent of hydrologic change and on plant success i ana 1 dyn ami cs,many of wh i ch are poorly known (Neiland and Viereck 1977). -Effects of Change in Albedo Cleared soils usually absorb more solar radiation than do vegetated soils and consequently thaw sooner in spring and deeper over the summer.Conversely,with less insulation they freeze earlier and deeper in the winter.Resulting changes in surface hydrology will cause plant communities to change as discussed in the preceding paragraphs. -Indi rect Consequences of Vegetation Removal. Methods of vegetation removal may have indirect impacts on other vegetation.Spruce budworm disease,which occurs in areas adjacent to the Susitna watershed (Hegg 1970),may be more likely to invade the area if spruce trees are cut but not removed or burned.Clearing may also enable other insects and decay organisms to increase in abundance (Kimmey and Stevenson 1957). The extent of topsoil removed during clearing in areas out- side the impoundment will affect succession by determining nutrient availability,soil moisture-retention capacity, E-3-167 and seed and sprout availability.The more topsoil that is retained or returned,the more rapidly restoration of the original vegetation type may be achieved.Invariably,how- ever,the first plants to naturally reestablish themselves in disturbed areas will be early successional plant species.These species are characteristically light- demandi ng,xerophytic,deep-rooted and non-speci fi c as to soil type. -Effects of Increased Fires The increased numbers of people in the area may cause increased incidences of fires.Fire has been a natural factor shaping plant communities in the area,so increased fires will cause changes in plant communities similar to those that can already be observed there. Because successional patterns following project-related fires are more likely to manifest themselves during the operations phase,they are treated in Section 3.3(a)(ii). (ii)Filling and Operation The Watana facility is scheduled to begin operation in 1993. Some construction-related impacts such as dust will diminish, but other prob 1ems such as erosi on wi 11 conti nue.The most conspicuous operation-rel ated changes in vegetation wi 11 be downstream as a result of streamflow regulation,but less drastic changes may be caused by micro-and mesoclimatic changes,increased fire incidence,and increased off-road vehicle (ORV)use.In many instances,vegetation will respond to these disturbances through characteristic successional recovery patterns.The following subsections describe operation-related changes and the successional patterns of communit i es as they recover from development induced change. -Vegetation Succession Following Removal On sites where vegetation has been removed,natural plant succession will occur unless prevented by inundation or f aci 1ity rnai ntenance.Successi ona1 patterns expected in forests,shrublands,and tundra are discussed below. Forest Areas and Shrub land Within forest and shrubland areas,newly cleared sites with largely intact mineral and organic soils will natur- ally revegetate with grass and herbaceous plants native to the original community (Conn and DeLapp 1982a,b).In E-3-168 - - interior Alaska,characteristic early successional herbs and shrubs are bluejoint reedgrass,field horsetail, prickly rose,bluebell,bunchberry,northern bedstraw, Labrador tea,Ameri can twi nfl ower,b1i te goosefoot ,pal e corydalis,American dragonhead,fireweed,crazyweed,and rough cinquefoi 1.Early successional trees are wi llow, aspen,and poplar. From 6 to 25 years after clearing,willow and/or alder will typically dominate areas that were originally forest or shrub1and (see reviews of forest succession by Neiland and Viereck 1977,VanCleve and Viereck 1981).Soon thereafter a tree canopy of young black spruce,wi llow and alder wi 11 develop.Dense stands of spruce with well-developed moss and lichen components will not develop for 50~100 years. Tundra Cl eari ng of tundra and concurrent removal of topsoi 1 will,except in certain rocky alpine sites,typically result in higher.soil temperatures and,if permafrost is present,a deeper thaw (Bl iss and Wei n 1972,Hernandez 1973,Gersper and Cha11 i nor 1975,Chapi n and Shaver 1981).Either of these conditions may lead to the devel- opment of a different plant community from that original- ly present and,possibly,a very long restoration period. But i r topsoi 1 is retai ned,recovery to the same commu- nity type can be rapid.The topsoils contain most of the available nutrients,rhizomes,and seeds required for rapid recolonization (see discussion by Chapin and VanCleve 1978).One to several centuries may be required for recovery from di sturbance where the topsoi 1 is lost (Brown et a1.1978). Although natural successional trends of tundra are far less predictable than for forested areas,the following sequence is likely to occur.The first vegetation types to reestablish in moist or wet tundra (with the organic layer retained)are likely to be cottongrass species and, if buried seed is present,Bigelow sedge on wet sites. Bl uejoi nt reedgrass may predomi nate on dri er sites (see Chapi nand Ch api n 1980,Chapi n and Shaver 1981,Gartner 1982).Grasses,such as arctic bluegrass,may also in- vade dry sites (Gartner 1982).As might be expected, non-native plants may establish themselves if seeds are supplied.Non-native plants may delay,but will not pre- vent reestablishment of native species. Within 5 to 10 years after revegetation begins,at least 50%and often 100%veget at i on cover is expected on all sites on which the original organic layer was retained. E-3-169 Native woody and herbaceous species characteristic of adjacent areas will also begin to invade within 10 years; possible species include willows,bog blueberry,mountain cranberry,northern Labrador tea,shrubby cinquefoil, prickly rose,Oxytropis campestris,lupine,green alder, and dwarf and resin birch.Reestablishment of normal densities,however,may require several decades. -Effects of Erosion and Deposition If the drawdown zone of the Watana impoundment is typical of that of other northern reservoi rs,it wi 11 remai n un- stable unti 1 bedrock or gravel/cobble/boulder substrates are encountered.Shoreline recession is likely with consequent loss of vegetat ion (Baxter and Gl aude 1980). Although some of the evolving shoreline above the drawdown zone will be readily colonized by early seral stages such as grasses and herbaceous species,stabilization of this upper shoreline may require 30 years or more (Newbury and Mal aher 1972). After the reservoir is filled,the water will warm adjacent hillsides,causing permafrost to melt and slides to occur. On the south side of the Watana impoundment,the permafrost layer is 60-90 m thick and is within 1°C of thawing. Numerous slides and land slumpages are therefore likely on this side of the reservoir.If these slides are small and the organic soil layers have not been lost,encroachment by rhizomatous species may enable rapid recolonization.If 1 arge slides occur,a full cycle of forest succession on melted permafrost may ensue,leading to black spruce and bog vegetation. Following beach (mudflat)development,flooding of upland areas may occasionally occur as a result of water displace- ment from slumpage (Kerr 1973)or from high flows.This occasional flooding of adjacent areas will likely stimulate new vegetation growth.Progradation of deltas into the reservoir at a number of creek tributary mouths is likely since deposition will occur when fast creek currents empty into slow-moving reservoir water.These deltas may even- tually be vegetated in the same manner as downstream flood- plain areas (see discussion below). -Effects of Altered Downstream Flows Because plant community development on floodplains is strongly regulated by peak streamflows,reduction of peak flows in the Susitna River to approximately 40%of pre- project conditions wi 11 have a profound effect on flood- p 1ai n communit i es downstream of the Watana and Devil Canyon Dams.Large amounts of floodplain will be relatively exempt from flooding,and hence from flood-regulated vege- tation succession. E-3-170 ...., '""" ~I r- I Many of the banks exposed by the reduced water flows will consist of coarse gravels and cobble.Alluvial banks in the Devil Canyon reservoir area may also be eroded as a result of the Watana Reservoir.Because most of the sedi- ment load of the Upper Susitna River will be deposited in the Watana Reservoir,the sediment carrying capacity of the river will be much greater than the available sediment load some distance downstream of the dam.Thus,some of the al- l uvi urn deposited duri ng flood stages and by wi nd wi 11 be eroded,leaving a predominantly rocky substrate.Few plants other than Dryas wi 11 grow on these rocky areas until an adequate soil layer is formed. Where alluvium is present,the pattern of floodplain suc- cession described by Viereck (1970),Van Cleve and Viereck (1981),and Neiland and Viereck (1977)will occur.This pattern is typical of vast areas of interior Alaska,and has been found to generally apply to the Susitna Basin (McKendrick et al.1982).Predicted river floodplain succession is depicted in Figure E.3.W3.Some deviations from this pattern may be observed.For example,the expected abrupt diminishment in f.lows will preclude development of "sa lt crust ll and associ ated successional species,such that this stage in plant succession may be bypassed. The effects of regulated flows on vegetation will change as one proceeds downriver,primarily because channel con- figurations are different and peak flow levels less modi- fi ed downstream.Potent ia1 effects on vegetat i on wi 11 be discussed separately for the river reaches between Watana and Devil Canyon,Devil Canyon to Talkeetna,Talkeetna to the Yentna Ri ver,and from there to Cook In let . .Watana to Devi 1 Canyon This reach of the river is mostly a single channel with armored banks and is structurally similar to the channel in the Devi 1 Canyon-Ta 1keetna reach.Warm water releases from the dam will prevent ice formation on the river in winter and ice scour in spring.Summer peak flows will be reduced.The elimination of ice scouring and the reduction in peak summer flows will hasten the encroachment of vegetat i on on newl y-exposed areas wi th adequate so i1s.Al so the open-water area in wi nter may promote rime-i ce format i on on adj acent vegetation,and the warmer water temperatures may alter the timing of plant phenology,but drastic vegetation changes as a consequence are not expected. E-3-171 ·Devil Canyon to Talkeetna The Susitna River in this reach has mostly a single channel or split channel configuration.Vegetational encroachment is currently controlled by th,e bankfull flow (recurrence interval of about 2 years)and ice scouring. The channel is armored with boulders and cobbles,and is relatively stable. Bredthauer and Drage (1982)expect narrowing of the main channel under post-project conditions.Abandonment of side channels in multi-channel reaches is also expected. These changes,however,wi 11 requi re many decades to occur.A reduction of suspended and bed sediment loads within the river is expected,and vegetation will not invade areas unti 1 a soi 1 veneer has been formed over the cobble-sized material forming the main channel peri- meter. The active floodplain between Devil Canyon ahd the Chulitna confluence covers 3220 ha;vegetated islands cover 636 ha of this figure.Comparisons of aerial photos taken in 1951 with those from 1980 indicate a few changes in bank lines and island planform,but generally the channel delineation in this reach is stable (Bredthauer and Drage 1981).At the pre-project maximum flow of about 51,.000 cfs,the water surface area (based on output from the Corps of Engineers HEC model)is about 2760 ha,and thus 460 ha within the floodp~ain are above the water level.Mature balsam poplar on the islands cover 411 ha,whereas tall shrubs cover an additional 183 ha.Thus,islands now covered by mature poplar and tall shrub are the only areas remaining above the water level at this peak flow.The post-project maximum flow in August of about 21-22,000 cfs will have a surface area of about 2100 ha;therefore,1120 ha wi 11 be above the water 1eve 1.Approximately 593 ha of the above-water area is present ly covered by mat ure pop 1ar and tall shrub types,allowing for 520 ha of new long-term vegetative co loni zat ion.Assumi ng a 10-year peri ad for soi 1 forma- tion,and the floodplain successional sequence described in Section 3.2(c},the vegetation on these 520 ha will probably consist of immature balsam poplar and alder at the end of the license period,or alternately,a Dryas- young meadow transitional community where little soi 1 accumu 1ates. Vegetation encroachment is also currently influenced by ice scouring,and some bank erosion occurs during ice-jam events at breakup.Post-project ice formation in this reach will be similar to present conditions since most of the frazil ice in this reach is formed at the point where E-3-172 -- the ri ver gradi ent fl attens after 1eavi ng Devi 1 Canyon, and the river water will have cooled to 0°before enter- i ng the canyon.However,post-proj ect breakup may have a lesser effect on vegetation because the river stage will be much lower during breakup,and the armored channel will confine the ice effects.As vegetation begins to encroach on the main channel,however,ice scouring will probably remove some vegetation each spring. Talkeetna to Yentna River There is a dramatic change in the morphology of the Susitna River from a split channel to a braided channel at the confluence of the Susitna,Chulitna,and Talkeetna Rivers.The flows contributed by each of these rivers at the confluence are 40 percent each for the Chulitna and Susitna Ri vers,and 20 percent for the Ta 1keetna Ri ver. The Chulitna contributes most of the sediment load at thi s poi nt. Downstream of Talkeetna,large changes in channel posi- tion and form presently occur whenever the river attains bankfull stage.At this stage,the active gravel flood- plain is subject to movement,with considerable local scouring and filling.Under post-project conditions,the bankfull flood wi 11 have a recurrence interval of about once every 5-10 years,as opposed to the present 1-2 year interval (Bredthauer and Drage 1982).Thus,the active gravel floodplain may gradually develop a vegetative cover,and the minor subchannels may become inactive. However,flooding events from the Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers will maintain some instability in the development of riparian communities. The Delta Island reach is a very unstable and complex channel network.Bredthauer and Drage (1982)stated that "project-induced changes in flow and sediment regime realized at this reach will be diluted by contribution from tributaries and by the Susitna satisfying its sedi- ment load by reworking the wide floodplain alluvial deposits.Basic changes in the overall channel network are not expected". It thus appears that some vegetation will colonize this reach between Talkeetna and the Yentna Ri ver,but that bankfull floods each decade will cause vegetation reces- sion.Fewer areas of rocky substrate exist in this reach,so early successional stages of willow,balsam poplar,and alder will be present between these flooding events.Ice scour i ng does not great ly.affect veget at ion in this reach due to the multi-channel configuration which allows flows to bypass any jams,and so no ice- E-3-173 re 1ated changes in vegetat i on are expected.Because of the annual variation in the timing and level of peak flows from the Chulitna,Talkeetna,Kashwitna,and other rivers,it is not possible to predict the area expected to be colonized by vegetation in the long-term as was done for the reach above Talkeetna. Yentna River to Cook Inlet The Yentna River contributes about 40 percent of the mean annual flow that enters Cook Inlet from the Susitna River.Below this confluence,few measureable changes are expected in the vegetation that could be related to the project.As Bredthauer and Drage (1982)state,lithe dilution effect of major and minor tributaries as well as the bal ancing of changes by the Susitna River system should mask any measurable changes that could occur as a result of the project for several decades ll •The tidal influence of Cook Inlet on the delta vegetation will also reduce possible effects of the project on vegetation to a minimum. -Climatic Changes and Effects on Vegetation Reservoirs act as a heat source or sink,warming and cool- ing less rapidly than the surrounding terrestrial sub- strate.These effects may delay the normal spring warming and fall cooling of adjacent environments and so affect the phenology and distribution of nearby vegetation.Spring air temperatures in the immediate vicinity of the reservoir will be cooler on the average than at present.The cumula- tive effects of a cooler spring environment on the entire plant community are unclear.Phenology studies are now in progress to determine the pattern of greenup near the pro- posed impoundment. The Watana impoundment should act as a heat source in fall, maintaining slightly warmer air temperatures than normal. The poss ib1e effects of th is on veget at i on are 1i kewi se unclear. Another thermal effect of the Watana impoundment wi 11 be its moderation of diurnal changes so that nearby nighttime temperatures during May and June will be higher and daytime temperatures will be lower than prior to development. Average fall temperatures near a lake of similar size to the Watanareservoir were characterized by a 5.5°C lower maximum and 2.2°C higher minimum than temperatures away from the lake (Baxter and Glaube 1980).Temperature effects likely would not extend beyond 2.5 km downwind of the water mass.The effects of these thermal ch anges on the vegetation are,again,difficult to assess. E-3-174 ..... .... - ,~ ""'" - The development of extensive fog banks near the Watana im- poundment may also affect vegetation.Fog banks tend to be persistent at reservoir sites after breakup (Buckler 1973, Baster and Glaude 1980),and can result in the deposition of copious quantities of hoar frost on trees and shrubs within 3 km of shore.Buckler (1973)reported that ice crystals 5-7 cm in length were found on vegetation close to a reservoir when temperatures below -23°C created steam fog . -Effects of Increased Human Use During the construction of the Watanafaci lity,construc- tion personnel and their families will have greater access opportunity than usual to a number of areas in the Upper Susitna Basin.The major human use impacts will probably be associated with use of off-road vehicles (ORVs)and accidental fires . .Off-Road Vehicles The effects on vegetation of ORV use varies with season, soil moisture and depth the presence or absence of perma- frost,vehicle weight,frequency of use,and other fac- tors (Chapin and Van Cleve 1978,Sparrow et al.1978, Fancy 1982). The ground layer of vegetation is more susceptible to damage by ORVs than are other layers.The plants are most susceptible to damage in summer.In winter,snow and ice layers minimize damage to the underlying vegeta- tion and the organic mat.Dry habitats are relatively immune to damage by ORVs.A few passes of light track vehicles over relatively dry well-drained soils may result in slight compaction of the organic and/or plant 1ayer,a net soi 1 temperature gai n,and deeper thaw of the active soil layer.The typical result is minor subsidence and an influx of ground water. Tundra and wetlands,especially sites with underlying permafrost,are the most vulnerable habitats.Repetitive off-road traffic or use of heavy vehicles in moist areas is likely to remove vegetation and also the underlying organic mat.This would cause soil temperature increases,deeper thaw,subsidence to one meter or more, groundwater input,and severe erosion that may last 5 to 50 years or more (Hok 1969,Rickard 1972,Lawson et al. 1978,Chapin and Shaver 1981).Quagmires may form as a result of ponding of surface water (Sparrow et al.1978) or gully formation may result.Near the Denali Highway, Sparrow et al.(1978)observed gullies formed after ORV E-3-175 use as wide as 6 to 8 m and up to 3 m deep,with severe side erosion and cave-ins,as well as active transport of sediment downhill.A similar effect was noted when fire- lines were established on Wickersham Dome,near Fairbanks (Lotspei ch 1979).The above effects wi 11 be most severe where ground ice content is high (Bliss and Wein 1972). Natural restoration of the organic layer of tundra soils may require more than a century (Chapin and Van Cleve 19- 78).However,some grasses,such as blue-joint reed- grass,may be able to rapidly invade mineral substrates (Gartner 1982). Fires Tundra vegetation would probably recover within 8 years from most fires.In the short term,increased productiv- ity of browsable shrubs such as willow,aspen,and birch is likely as a result of the release of soil nutrients (Figure E.3.W4). In shrubland and forest,a variety of successional pat- terns might result from a fire,depending on vegetation type,soi 1 moi sture and temperature,time of year,and post-fire weather patterns (Figure E.3.W5).For example, some willow species,while highly adapted for reseeding burned areas,produce seeds that are viable for only short periods of time in the spring or fall (Zasada and Vi ereck 1975,Zasada and Densmore 1977).A dry period following a burn would most likely lead to the initi al establishment of horsetail,fireweed and blue-joint reedgrass,particularly if a thick organic layer remains. Bog blueberry,mountain cranberry,prickly rose,and raspberry would be expected to proliferate following light fires where these species are already established. On the other hand,a heavy fire would destroy blueberry and cranberry species,but would enhance seed germination of roses and raspberri es (Densmore and Zadsada 1977, Densmore 1979). Fires on steep slopes result in increased runoff due to vegetation loss,and may cause mud or landslides.In other areas thermokarst topography and gullies may result from fires (Viereck and Schandelmeier 1980). £-3-176 - - """ - (b)Devil Canyon Development (i)Construction -Vegetation Removal Because of the narrow,steep configurat ion of Devil Canyon, vegetative losses will be substantially less than for the Watana Dam.Approximately 2305 forested ha and 70 shrubland ha will be inundated or cleared (Table E.3.W28).An additional 223 ha will be altered or lost as a result of the camp,village and borrow areas.As discussed in the previous section,natural revegetation of some distur-bed sites will probably occur.The probable successional sequences, reviewed in section 3.3(a)(ii),also apply to the Devil Canyon region. -Vegetation Loss by Erosion The most 1 ikely source of vegetation by erosion at the Devil Canyon site will be rock slides along steep banks, especially on the south side of the reservoir.Although most rockfalls will occur at elevations of 274-396 m and so will be below the eventual fill level,some slides may also occur above this lone.Only sporadic concentrations of permafrost have been found in Devil Canyon.Resulting ero- sional problems and vegetation loss through permafrost melting should be minimal. -Vegetation Damage by Wind and Dust Such wind-related phenomena as tree blowdown are less like- ly at the Devil Canyon site than at the Watana site because the maximum fetch is far less at the Devi 1 Canyon site. Dust wi 11 be generated by c1eari ng of the Devi 1 Canyon impoundment area.But because the impoundment area is in a narrow vall ey that is more protected from wi nd than the Watana impoundment area,resulting impacts to vegetation are expected to be relatively minor. -Effects of Altered Drainage Current projected borrow areas impinge on a number of small 1akes and ponds south of the Devi 1 Canyon site.Excavation in these areas may result in the creation of new aquatic or bog habitat with ensuing development of bog vegetation (see section(3.3(a)(i)). The steep configuration of the dam area will severely limit other changes in drainage patterns or water table levels. Any downs 1ope cuts made duri ng construct i on may,however, promote active gully formation and associated vegetation loss. E-3-177 .Effects of Change in Albedo Cl eari ng of the Devi 1 Canyon dam site wi 11 resu It ina warming of underlying soi Is prior to fi 11 ing.Since permafrost is not generally present,impacts on adjacent vegetation will be minimal • .Indirect Consequences of Vegetation Removal Indirect effects of different clearing methodologies were reviewed previously for the Watana site (Section 3.3{a) (i)).These effects are also applicable to the Devil Canyon area,a lthough the steep confi gurat i on of the canyon may make recontouri ng and topsoi 1 rep 1acement efforts less effective. (ii)Filling and Operation The Devi 1 Canyon impoundment should fill in about two months. No appreciable downstream effects should be evident during filling.Above the dam,filling will result in diminished dust and summer and perhaps will slightly alter microclimate, especially on the windward side of the reservoir. Because the drawdown zone for the Dev i1 Canyon impoundment wi 11 be 1ess than one meter duri ng most of the year,and shorelines are steep,the rise and fall of the water table will probably affect vegetation only in a narrow band adj acent to the reservoi r.The consoli dated,rocky character of the substratum will in most cases limit water intrusion and soil waterlogging and few shifts toward wet or bog vegetation are likely. Relatively few new impacts on vegetation are expected during operation of the Devil Canyon dam.The old large landslide at river mile 175 could move after filling,temporarily blocking river flow and flooding upstream areas.This could cause a loss of mid-and late-successional vegetation in areas such as the mouths and floodplains of Fog and Tsusena Creeks. Meso-and microclimatic effects on vegetation w"i11 be very small and probably well within the range of normal variation, due to the relatively small size of the reservoir. -Vegetation Succession Following Clearing The same general vegetational succession patterns will occur on cleared,unsubmerged lands of the Devi 1 Canyon area that were descri bed for theWatana site (see 3.3 (a) (ii)).However,due to the steep,rocky character of Devil Canyon a much greater mosaic of vegetation types may devel- op.On some slopes,loss of soil may result in shifts to E-3-178 ~, ~, -, - - low-lying alpine type communities,dominated by Dryas, rather than a gradual return to shrub 1and and forests. -Erosion and Deposition Due to the geological character of the Devil Canyon region, erosional/depositional changes affecting vegetation will be minimal following filling of the reservoir. -Downstream Effects Downstream effects of reservoi r operat i on on veget at ion w'j 11 be the same as for the ~~atana dam,except that the Devil Canyon operation will greatly diminish winter ice in the Devi 1 Canyon to Talkeetna reach.Warm water released from the dam in wi nter will result in an open-water stretch at least as far as the Chulitna confluence.Steam fog from this open water i·n winter could cause frost buildup on vegetation along the river (Buckler 1973).The conse- quences to vegetation of frosting are not clear. (c)Access (i)Construction Approximately 230 ha (34 m x 67 km)of mixed tundra types of vegetation will be cleared for access.The vegetation adja- cent to the access road will be subject to indirect effects including dust deposition,erosion,leaching of nutrients in recently drained regions,and waterlogging in areas of blocked drainage.These effects are all discussed in more detail in 3.3(a),(i)and (iii). When the Devil Canyon dam is built,an additional road segment will connect the Devil Canyon and Watana sites along a corridor north of the river.Construction of this road entails clearing of an additional 60 km (approximately 200 hal of roadway,as well as adding 23 km (78 hal of railroad right-of-way between Devil Canyon and Gold Creek on the south side of the Susitna Ri ver.Spruce and mixed forests,tall and low shrubl and,and tundra vegetation types wi 11 all be crossed. Many of the same impacts experienced in clearing the Watana and Devil Canyon impoundments (Section 3.3(a),(i)and (b), (i))will occur in this access segment.These include ero- sion,dust deposition,and drainage changes. ( i i)Operat i on Use of the access roads wi 11 result in continued dust-and erosion-related effects on the vegetation bordering the E-3-179 access road.In addition,access roads will facilitate increased human disturbances,including ORV use and a higher incidence of fire,as "'well as possible clearing and develop- ment related to other projects.These disturbances and their impact on vegetation are discussed in detail in Section 3.3(a)(ii).. In contrast to the access roads,the proposed rail connection from Gold Creek to Devil Canyon will minimize off-road access and fire incidence.The rail connection will primarily tra- verse spruce and mixed deciduous type forests. (d)Transmission Corridors (i)Construction Transmi ss i on corri dors const itute another source of veget a- tion loss and/or disturbance (Table E.3.W29).Woodland and open black and white spruce communities (962 ha)and open and closed conifer-deciduous forest (1172 ha)constitute the main vegetation types that will be disturbed. Wetlands (113 ha),tundra (203 hal,and shrub1and (646 ha), are included in the proposed rights-of-way.In all the above cases,the vegetation types affected represent small frac- tions (less than 4.2 percent)of the total available vegeta- tion types within the corridors.Of this portion only a neg- ligible fraction of the vegetation will be totally eliminated by intermittent placement of control stations,relay build- ings and towers.The remaining vegetation will be subject to selective clearing of trees and tall shrubs.Thus low-lying vegetation and small shrubs will remain largely undisturbed. Such cleared areas have the potent ia1 of i ncre ased browse production by willow and birch shrubs following over-story removal. (ii)Operation After establishment of the transmission corridors,periodic maintenance via selective clearing or trimming will be required.Such manual clipping may stimulate leaf and twig growth of willow and other browse species (Wolff 1978,Chapin et al.1975).On the other hand,evergreen shrubs such as Labrador tea and other woody shrubs are likely to show increased mortality if damaged in the process of clearing (Chapin 1980,Chapin and Shaver 1982).But the potentially most damaging aspect of operation may be increased ORV use in the rights-of-way (see Section 3.3(a)(iii)). E-3-180 - ,~ - ..... (e)Impact Summary Th is section summari zes the important impacts of the Su sitna Hydroelectric Project on vegetation.It also presents the impact issues in order of their priorities of importance. (i)Watana Reservoir Area The immediate vicinity of the Watana Reservoir will be the region most adversely affected by the Susitna project.In addition to the 14,409 ha of plant cover that will be removed or cleared within the impoundment and associated use areas, an unknown area of vegetation will also be lost as a result of mass land slumpage from permafrost melting along the south side of the reservoir.Changes in the water table and ero- sional processes are likely to increase the relative abun- dance of bog vegetation.Increases in .dust during construc- tion,changes in local micro-climates during operation, increases in ORV use,and changes in the incidences of fires may affect vegetation to a lesser extent. ..- (i i)Devil Canyon Reservoir Area - Because of the narrow,steep configuration of the valley and the smaller size of the impoundment,Devil Canyon will affect a smaller area of vegetation than will Watana.During con- struction,2598 ha,primari 1y forests,wi 11 be inundated or cleared for the impoundment and facilities.During filling and operation,dust problems wi 11 moderate,erosional pro- cesses will occur less frequently,and mesoclimatic change is 1ikely to be negl igible.Rock sl ides pose the greatest threat as a source of additional vegetational loss and one large slide at river mile 175 may also cause some upstream flooding,with accompanying floodplain successional events at new tributary mouths. (iii)Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Downstream floodplain vegetation will increase in the area of floodplain it covers,and more of it will progress to late succession as a result of fewer flood episodes and decreased ice scouring following dam construction.Because of the armored condition of the Susitna channel between Talkeetna and Devi 1 Canyon,however,much of the newly exposed river banks will have insufficient soil development to allow imme- diate establishment of vegetation other than pioneering com- munities.Areas where sufficient alluvium is available will develop into the medium and tall shrub stages during the license period. E-3-181 (iv)Cook Inlet to Talkeetna The confluence of the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers and other streams south of Ta1keetna~and the strong tidal influence on the lower reaches of the Susitna.Ri ver are expected to ob- scure effects resulting from diminished flows caused by the dams.Annual flooding by the Chulitna and/or Talkeetna rivers is 1i key to mai ntai n much of the downstream vegetati on in the floodplain in successional stages even without contributions from the Susitna. (v)Access and Transmission Corridors Access roads and railroads will remove several hundred ha of primarily tundra vegetation types.Additional small areas of vegetat i on at roadside margi ns wi 11 be affected by dust ~ changed surface water regime~and road mai ntenance act i vi- ties.The areas of each vegetation type lost and modified are small in compari son to the total a.reas of each type that exist in the regions traversed by the roads. Transmi ssi on corri dors wi 11 modi fy up to a few thousand ha of vegetation.The greatest changes will come in forest types~ where the overstory must be cleared to construct and maintain the rights-of-way.As with roads~the area of each vegeta- tion type that will be affected is small in comparison to what exists regionally. (vi)Prioritization of Impact Issues In this section,impacts to vegetation are discussed in order from most to least important.Losses of vegetation are judged important in proportion to total acreage lost and in indirect proportion to amounts of each type present regional- ly.Plant community changes are judged to be less important than losses per see As yet,there is no basis for evaluating whether communi ty changes are "good"or "bad". -Direct Losses of Vegetation .Watana Direct losses for the Watana project include 12,667 ha of vegetati on for the dam,impoundment and spi 11way.An additional 1742 ha have been designated for use as camp, village,air strip,and borrow areas.These potential losses account for on 1y 1 percent of a 11 veget at ion in the Upper Susitna Basin~but 3.6 percent of the vegeta- t i on present ina 16-km-wi de area spanni ng the Susi tna River from Gold Creek to the mouth of the Maclaren River. More importantly,substantial losses of certain vegetation types will be sustained during construction of E-3-182 ,~ - - - - - - the Watana Dam.Losses of forested areas may total 8.3 percent of the 16-km-wi de area.Losses of open and closed birch forest will be particularly large,greater than 20 percent for the 16-km wi de area.The losses of these forest types wi 11 mean substant i al habitat losses for some wildlife,especially black bears,moose,pine marten,beavers,passerine birds,and raptors. •Devil Canyon Di rect losses for the Devi 1 Canyon project will i ncl ude 2376 ha of forests,tundra and shrubland.Negligible amounts of tundra and shrub land «.05 pecent)wi 11 be cleared,but 0.7 percent of all forested lands in the upper basin (1.8 percent of the 16-km-area)will be affected.Because of the steepness of Devi 1 Canyon, these losses are relatively small compared to Watana Can- yon and comparatively less important for wildlife. Again,however,appreciable quantities of closed birch forest (18.6 percent of the 16-km-area)will be elimin- ated. ·Access Roads The Watana access road will result in a loss of approximately 230 ha of mixed tundra vegetation types. Additional losses of about 200 hectares for access roads and 78 ha for rail will be utilized for access to the Devil Canyon facility,should this be built.These routes wi 11 span spruce forests,tall and low shrub 1and and tundra vegetation types.In relation to possible losses from other aspects of the project,these direct losses are small. •Transmission Corridors Of the total 3483 hectares of vegetation on rights-of- way for transmission lines,only a small fraction (10 percent)need be subject to initial clearing.A median strip for transport of personnel and materials,plus smaller areas for placement of control stations,relay buildings and towers,will need to be cleared,whereas other portions of the transmission corridors will only require selective clearing or top-cutting of tall trees and shrubs. -Indirect Losses of Vegetation Substantial additional losses of vegetation may occur due to erosion,permafrost melting and subsequent land slides and s 1umpage,ORV use,b lowdown of trees and other causes (see Section 3.3(a)(i)).While some of these losses will E-3-183 be short-term with typical vegetational succession ensuing, or with shifts to new vegetation types for that area, longterm vegetat i ona 1 losses enduri ng for 30 to more than 100 years may occur on sites of continual erosion,1and slumpage,or ORV use.The amounts that wi 11 be lost because of these factors are small compared to amounts inundated by the reservoirs. ·Watana Indirect losses of vegetation are projected to be great- est at the Watana site,where 1arge areas on the south side of the impoundment are underlain by 200-300 feet of permafrost at near melting temperature.Also,because of the expected large size of the reservoir,other erosional processes such as wind erosion,together with effects of dust,may cause very localized vegetation loss,especial- ly in wind-exposed areas. ·Devi 1 Canyon The smaller,steeper nature of Devil Canyon will severely limit indirect losses of vegetation.Except for the pos- sibility of one massive flow near river mile 175,rock slides occurring above the impoundment represent the greatest threats and these wi 11 result in only small scale losses. ·Access Roads Alternations of vegetation adjacent to access roads will occur principally where drainage patterns have been changed.Berms along road shoulders will result in swamping or waterlogging of poorly drained soils,with a corresponding shift to depauperate bogs.In other areas drai nages may merge,break through berms and roads,and cause erosional losses of vegetation.Increased uti 1 iza- tion of ORVs along access roads and road maintenance may damage adjacent areas. ·Transmission Corridors Little indirect loss is likely as a result of direct clearing or construction,but uncontrolled ORV access could affect vegetation on and adjacent to corridors. Forests,shrub 1 ands,tundra and wet 1ands are di spersed along thi s area. -Alteration of Vegetation Types In many instances,natural succession of cleared or dis- turbed areas not subject to i nundat i on wi 11 resu It in E-3-184 - ..... - - - ..... - .- ,...., - vegetation type changes.For example,primary herbaceous and weedy vegetation and secondary shrub growth may follow clearing of sites.There may be development of fast-grow- ing algal species and floating vegetation in shallow areas of the impoundment(s).Vegetation succession trends fol- lowing man-caused fires are generally predictable . •D,ownstream Floodplain The most important alteration to result from the dam(s) wi 11 be downstream between Ta 1keetna and Go 1d Creek, where annual spring and summer flooding and spring scour by ice jams will be ameliorated.As a resu1t t some of the previously pulse-stabilized communities will mature.The willow and balsam poplar shrub will change to mature ba1- s am poplar and thence to spruce.Withi n the 1i cense period t the development of vegetation on newly exposed banks and islands will proceed only to the medium and tall shrub stages. Watana One area of potentially important impacts is tundra vege- tation surrounding the Watana Reservoir.Disturbance may cause warmi ng of the soi 1,me 1t i ng of the permafrost,and deepening of the active layer.In well-drained areas t this may result in increased growth and productivity by the existing plant community,but in waterlogged areas a shift to bog vegetation is likely.If the organic layer is lost during disturbance,long-term losses of vegeta- t i on may result. Most disturbed forests and shrub area disturbed near the reservoir wi 11 recover naturally.The ensui ng patterns of vegetational succession will be accelerated if the organic layer is retained and if root suckers or seeds of veget at ion remai n. Devi 1 Canyon Outs i de the actual impoundment and dam site,very few alterations of vegetation types are anticipated at Devil Canyon.Forest types wi 11 be subject to minor altera- tions,primarily near borrow sites G and K,and near camp and village sites.likewise,changes in drainage,water- logging of soil or permafrost melting will be highly localized because the soil is generally very rocky and well drained,with only sporadic occurrences of perma- frost.The smal1er t steeper character of Devi 1 Canyon will also act to limit micro-climatic and mesoc1imatic alterations. E-3-185 .Access Roads and Railroads The access roads between the Devi 1 Canyon and Watana sites and between Watana and the Denali Highway,as well as rail construction between Devil Canyon and Gold Creek,will necessarily alter drainage patterns and may induce dust-related alterations in vegetation at roadsides.The effects of altered drainages have been summarized above . .Transmission Corridors Se 1ect i ve c1eari ng or top-cutting of tall veget at i on will result in local shifts in plant types from trees to shrubs.Wet and moist tundra areas and their peri- pheries will be more susceptible to waterlogging by vehicul ar traffic with subsequent development of bog and/or black spruce speci eS in pl ace of cottongrass and shrub species. 3.4 -Mitigation Plan (a)Watana Development (i)Construction The direct removal of vegetation within a total area of approximately 14,409 ha wi 11 result from construction of the Watana Dam,impoundment area,and anci 11 ary project facilities (e.g.,access roads,airstrips,camp,village, materi al sites).For project features outside of the Watana impoundment area,mitigative features have been incorporated into engineering design and construction planning to avoid or minimize the impact of vegetation removal during construction.Facilities have been sited on a case-by-case bas is to mi nimi ze c1eari ng requirements, both by choice of unforested or sparsely forested locations and by consolidating structures to disturb the minimum area of ground surface.The construction c~np and village have been located together on an unforested site immedi ate ly adjacent to the Watana construction area (Exhibit A). Equipment and vehicle use will be confined to gravel roads and pads.Off-road or all-terrain vehicle use will be prohibited.Service roads will be established along planned connecting corridors to channelize transportation activities. Minimal forest clearing will be necessary to establish the 1imited infrastructure of temporary roads,fuel and equip- ment storage areas,and other support facil~ties joining the construction site with the camp and vlllage.The entire affected area of dam and ancillary facilities, inclUding the emergency spillway,will be confined to a radius not exceeding about 3,000 meters. E-3-186 ~I - -.. I ..... .... - Facility siting has avoided wet areas to the maximum extent consistent with logistic requirements.Both the main camp and the village site have been selected to provide well- drained land with existing slopes of 2 to 3 percent. Siting has minimized the necessity for fill placement in wet1ands~in accordance with the guidelines of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.Minimizing fill placement has correspondingly reduced gravel extraction volume demand and related vegetation cleaning requirements.Where fill placement is necessary~as for the construct ion camp and equipment maintenance area~gravel will be placed directly on the vegetative ground cover~without removal of organic overburden. Where construction activities require removal of the organi c 1ayer and topsoi 1~these materi a1s wi 11 be stock- piled for use in subsequent site rehabilitation measures. Overburden stockpiles will be sited in stab1e~well-drained locations and bermed to contain runoff.Depleted or non- operational upland borrow pits will be used as overburden storage areas where feasible. Inorganic excavated material suitable as aggregate or fill will be used for construction purposes~for rehabilitation of depleted material sites~or for solid waste disposal site maintenance.Where such use is not feasib1e~excava- t ion spoil wi 11 be haul ed to the impoundment area and dis- posed of in designated locations which wi 11 eventually be inundated.Vegetation outside of the impoundment area will not be disturbed for spoil disposal purposes. Gravel extraction for construction of the earthfi11 dam~ cofferdams~access and service roads~and facility founda- tion pads will be the major cause of vegetation removal other than clearing and flooding of the impoundment area. Where haul distances are feasib1e~gravel for roads~pads~ and other ancillary facilities will be obtained from borrow areas inside the future Watana impoundment (proposed Borrow Sites D~J~or L).Borrow material from Susitna River floodplain or first-level terrace locations downstream from the Watana Dam site~or from any other river or stream~ will not be used for ancillary facility construction • Active floodp1ain~first-level terrace~or streambed sites outside of the Watana impoundment area will be cleared and excavated only in cases where a specific type of material required for construction of the Watana Dam itself is not available within a feasible haul distance inside the impoundment area.For example~geotechnical investigations h ave shown that the nearest feas ib1e source of concrete aggregate and fi lter material suitable for dam construction is Borrow Site E (Acres 1980-82 Geotechnical Report).This E-3-187 site encompasses about 325 ha of first-level terrace extendi ng about 3600 meters a long the north side of the Susitna River.Vegetation is almost entirely closed coni- ferous forest with minor areas of alder,shrub,and tundra. The potential excavation area .includes the mouth and 1.5 ki lometers of Tsusena Creek,and the mouth and about .75 kilometers of Bear Creek.Elevation across the site varies from about 427 meters near river level to about 515 meters along the northern boundary of the site.More than half of Borrow Site E is outside the proposed 441-meter 1imi ts of the future Devil Canyon Reservoir. Borrow Site E will be developed by pit excavation using drag lines,in accordance with established guidelines (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1982;U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 1982).Precise material volume requirements and excavations limits for the site have not yet been estab- 1 ished.However,gravel wi 11 be extracted from narrow, variable-depth pits,with maximum depth of excavation ranging from about 38 meters in the southwest corner of the site to about 6 meters in the northeast corner (Acres 1980-81 Geotechnical Report).Pit excavation,as opposed to the clearing and scraping of large areas of terrace, will minimize requirements for vegetation removal and faci- litate rehabilitation for wildlife habitat enhancement. (ii)Filling There is no way to avoid vegetation loss from filling of the impoundment area.Partial compenstion is being planned,however,for vegetation components important as wildlife habitat.For example,loss of moose winter browse may be compensated through habitat enhancement measures or the acquisition of replacement lands where future develop- ment which might otherwise occur will be prohibited (Section 4.4). The Watana Reservoir filling schedule has been adjusted to minimize impacts of vegetation removal.Clearing of vege- t at ion within the impoundment area wi 11 proceed system- aticaly in stages over a three-year period during the winter months.Access routes to the clearing zones will be kept within the future reservoir.Clearing will be con- fined to the area to be inundated during each following year,so that uncleared vegetation wi 11 not be flooded. This practice will help reduce uprooting of uncleared trees and shrubs from erosion,blowdown,thaw,and slumping. E-3-188 ~- """ ~, - - - -; - - - Because c 1eari ng wi 11 be conducted fo 11 owi ng dam construc- t i on,downstream si ltat i on from eros i on runoff w~11 be minimized through settling within the impoundment.!How- ever,it is expected that downstream si ltatior)wi 11 increase as a result of reservoir clearing.This impact is discussed further in Exhibit E,Section 2,Water Resources. Cleared slash and debris will be stockpiled and!burned under continuous superV1Slon during the same dlearing season.Prompt burning will help to prevent the s~read of spruce budworm and other insects or decay organism~.It is not anticipated that merchantable timber will occur in quantities sufficient to justify removal for sale. I Outsi de of the impoundment area,impacts of vegetation removal will be partially rectified by site rehabilitation and reduced over time by the gradual reestabl ishment and succession of native vegetation.Disturbed areas wi 11 be graded to contour and evenly covered with organic over- burden and topsoil previously stockpiled for this purpose. Fertilizer high in phosphorus (e.g.,10-20-10 or 8-32-16, .N-P-K)wi 11 be appl ied at a rate sufficient to supply 85 to 110 ki lograms of nitrogen per hectare. Following the spreading of organic overburden,topsoil,and fertilizer,the site surface will be scarified to a depth of 10 centimeters using a rake towed by a mini-Rolligon- type vehicle.This procedure wi 11 mix the organics with the underlying mineral soil,aerate the mixture,and 1 ightly compact the surface.During the second and third growing seasons,followup appl ications of fertil izer will be made at one-half to one-third the original rates. Where erosion potential or aesthetic considerations can be demonstrated not to be i nvo lved,sHe rehabi 1it at i on wi 11 emphasize application of organics and nutrients and mini- mize seeding.This practice will encourage the reinvasion of native species from the surrounding parent population. For lightly-disturbed sites with intact topsoil~fertili- zation alone should be sufficient to facilitate revege- tation. Sites with high erosion or visual impact potential will be fertilized and seeded with fast-growing native grasses appropri ate to the cl imate and geography of the Susitna Basin.To minimize erosion,all sites will be rehabili- tated by the first growing season following removal of structures and equipment. E-3-189 ~_·_,.,.w •--_. (iii)Operation Reductions in spring breakup and summer peak flows,channel width,and sediment deposition will decrease cyclic vari- ations in the successional stages of riparian vegetation downstream from the Watana Dam site,especially in the reach upstream from the confluences of the Chul itna and Talkeetna Rivers.Successional stages of riparian vegeta- tion associated with the active floodplain will be moni- tored yearly.In the event that successional variability is found to decrease,with later stages becoming dominant, periodic controlled flooding wi 11 be impl emented to help maintain primary and secondary successional stage~. Following construction of the Watana Dam,permanent staff and facilities will be required to support project opera- tion and maintenance.Housing and ancillary structures for about 130 staff and their families will be built on land previ ous ly disturbed by the temporary vi 11 age.Cl eari ng and construction in undisturbed areas will be avoided. Gravel wi 11 be required for roaa maintenance and other purposes during project operation.To minimize the expan- sion of existing borrow areas or the establishment of new ones,abandoned cofferdams~service roads,airstrips, foundat i on pads ~and other grave 1 structures wi 11 be used as material sources for operation and maintenance purposes. These structures will be rehabilitated only if such use is not anticipated during the life of the project. (b)Devil Canyon Development (i)Construction The mit i gat i ve approach di scussed for constructi on of the Watana Dam,impoundment,and ancillary facilities will apply also to Devil Canyon development.In addition~two features have received particular attention: -Di sposa 1 of spoi 1 produced duri ng construct i on of the Devil Canyon saddle dam;and -Design and placement of the railhead facility and rail- road extension relative to Jack Long Creek and associated wet 1ands. Depleted or nonoperational portions of Borrow Site G will be used for disposal of spoil produced during construction of the saddle dam at Devil Canyon.Borrow Site G will be the aggregate source for construction of the concrete arch dam and will be excavated prior to saddle dam construction. E-3-190 - """ - - - - - ..... - (c) (i i ) Access Designated containment areas will be established within the borrow area to accommodate spoi 1 produced by saddle dam site excavation and by extraction and processing of rock- fill material at Quarry Site K,approximately 1.2 kilo- meters to the south (Exhibit A,Section 7.2).Borrow Site G,at about Elevation 303 meters,will be about 138 meters below the surface level of the Devil Canyon reservoir. Therefore,spoil disposal necessary for saddle dam con- struction will not require clearing of vegetation outside the impoundment area. The rai"'head facility at Devil Canyon will consist of a poured concrete pad approximately 800 meters long and 240 meters wide,accommodating the main track,two sidings,and areas for equipment,offloading,and storage.The Jack Long Creek drainage and associated wetlands occupy a swale i mmedi ately south of the construct i on camp and vi 11 age, imposing difficult constraints on the siting of the rail- road extension alignment and railhead. To minimize removal of riparian vegetation,fill placement in wetlands,and direct physical disturbance to Jack Long Creek,the terminal portion of the railroad extension has been kept as high on the hillside south of the creek as possible.It generally follows the transmission line cor- r i dor at the 500-to 550-meter contour 1eve 1,and ter- minates on relatively flat ground at an elevation of about 454 meters.This alignment and siting keeps the railroad extension and railhead facility on higher ground well out of the Jack Long Creek drainage. Filling and Operation Mitigative measures implemented during filling and opera- tion at Devil Canyon will be similar to those planned for the Watana development.All construction faci 1ities wi 11 be dismantled and removed,and disturbed terrain rehabil- itated.Permanent staff requi red for operation and mai n- tenance wi 11 be housed at the Watana permanent vi 11 age. Borrow Site G will be completely within the impoundment; the primary rectification objective for Quarry Site K will be to ensure sediment-free drainage over cl eanrock sur- faces into Cheechako Creek. (i)Construction The project access route has been designed to traverse relatively unproductive upland tundra,minimizing wetland crossings and avoiding closed forest along the Denali Highway-to-Watana segment,and keeping north of the Susitna River ;n unforested shrub or tundra between Watana and Dev;1 Canyon.The open forest and wetl ands of the Fog Lakes and Stephan Lake areas south of the Susitna River E-3-191 Merchantable timber cleared along this segment will be sectioned and hauled to Gold Creek for public consumption. Slash and debris will be gathered and burned to minimize the spread of spruce budworm or other organisms as a potential result of clearing. A major objective of access road alignment and design has been to avoid or minimize fill placement in wetlands,in accordance with guidelines established by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Alaska District,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (1982).A flexible design speed, varying between 40 and 55 miles per hour,has been incor- porated to allow short-radius vertical and horizontal curves.This approach facilitates site-specific alignment adjustments to avoid sensitive features,and minimizes fill requirements in complex terrain. Where permafrost conditions permit,routing emphasizes sidehill cuts to avoid low-lying wet areas and maximize potential for balancing cut and fill quantities.Where bermed constructon capable of blocking sheet flow cannot be avoided,equalization culverts or serial bridging will be employed.Emphasis on side borrow techniques will minimize the need for material sites away from the alignment,and correspondingly minimize vegetation clearing requirements. (ii)Operation Public access will create a potential for disturbance to vegetation during project operation.Use of off-road or all-terrain vehicles by hunters has already produced exten- sive vegetation removal and soil disturbance in the Butte Lake area,where vehicles are driven directly onto the tundra from the Denali Highway.Management provisions will be requ i red to prevent a simi 1ar imp act from occurri ng along the Denali Highway-to-Watana and Watana-to-Devi1 Canyon segments of the project access route. The Alaska Power Authority is reviewing management options for avoiding or minimizing access-related disturbances to vegetation during the life of the project.These options range from total prohibition of publ ic access to restric- tion of off-road or all-terrain vehicle use within the project area.Interagency agreement wi 11 be required to implement policies affecting the public lands of the area. For example,the Denali Highway is under review by the Bureau of Land Management for inclusion in the National Scenic Highway System (R.Ward and M.Wrabetz 1982).The project access route may also be eligible for this designation,which would entail restrictions on off-road vehicle use and other potentially disturbing activities initiated from the access road. E-3-192 -. ,~ '"'" - - ...... - (d) The Susitna Hydroelectric Project Recreation Plan is pre- sented in Exhibit E~Section 7.A major objective of the Recreation Plan is to establish patterns of public access that will minimize and localize access-related impacts through the use of trails and designated camping areas. The Recreation Plan is consistent with fish and wildlife habitat protection priorities established for the project. In addition~the phased design of the Recreation Plan will ensure that implementation will be gradual and based on monitoring of fish,vegetation~and wi ldlife impacts as well as recreational user needs.Implementation of each phase wi 11 be subject to interagency revi ew and concur- rence. Transmission (i)Construction The transmission corridor from Watana to the Intertie is the .shortest feasible route,and crosses mostly upl and tundra. Where forest occurs,the route largely follows forest-tundra and forest-shrub trans it i on zones where c1eari ng requi re- ments will be minimal.Construction of the transmission lines will not involve removal of organic overburden,ground cover,or shrub vegetation;soil disturbance will be limited to installation of anchor points for transmission tower cable supports.All transmission-related construction between Watana and the Intertie junction at Gold Creek will occur duri ng wi nter months when an adequa1:e snow pack exi sts to support ground equipment and vehicles.Only flat-tread Nodwell-type or ballon-tired Rolligon-type vehicles will be used.Where winter access is not feasible or snow-free conditions are required,helicopter-supported construction wi 11 be used. Additions to the existing Healy-to-Fairbanks and Willow-to- Anchorage transmission corridors,and to the Willow-to- Healy Intertie~wi 11 be made adjacent to the establ ished 1i nes except where constrai nts of 1and ownershi p or use require re-routing.Where new routing is required,align- ment alternatives are designed to minimize crossings of active floodplains~streams,and wetlands.Alignments avoid lakes and parallel streams by a minimum 150 meters of undis- turbed terrain.Transmission towers will not be placed in active floodplains. Wi nter construct i on procedures wi 11 be fo 11 owed for trans- mission line additions routed through previously undisturbed areas.Where winter access is not feasible or snow-free conditions are required,hel icopter-supported construction W'j 11 be used. E-3-193 (ii)Operation The primary env i ronmenta 1 object i ve for transmi ssi on corri- dor operation and maintenance is to avoid creating new or alternative access routes for all-terrain vehicles.To achieve this objective,all operation and maintenance activ- ities will be implemented without road support,except where suitable roads already exist.Operation and maintenance tasks will therefore require winter scheduling or helicopter support. In keeping with the objective of avoiding public access by transmission corridors,vegetation clearing will not be a routine feature of transmission 1ine maintenance.Trees that present a hazard to power 1ines or prevent access to transmission towers for maintenance or repair will be cut. Woody shrub and herbaceous vegetation in previously undis- turbed areas wi 11 not be cleared during maintenance.The use of herbi cides will be proh i bited. E-3-194 - - - ,.... 4 -WILDLIFE 4.1 -Intrdduction Popul ations of many wi Idllfe specles lnhablt the Susitna project area. rhe importance of each population for purposes of the Susitna project depends on the abundance of lndlViduals in the populatlon and/or the contribution of the population to recreation,subsistence or commerce. Species classified as threatened or endangered are considered particu- larly important.The emphasis of this report is on those wildlife resources that are more important than others for one or all of these reasons. (a)The Vertebrate Fauna Birds and mammals are the wlldllte groups ot lnterest in this study.Kessel et al.(1982)encountered 135 species of birds in the Susitna Basin above Devil Canyon;82 species occur along the Susitna River floodplain below Devil Canyon.Sixteen species of smal I mammals--shrews,rodents,hares and porcupines--are known to occur in the upper Susitna basin.Moose,caribou,Dall sheep, brown bears,black bears,wolves and wolvennes are big game species that occur in the project area.Furbearers include the beaver,muskrat,river otter,mink,pine marten,red fox,lynx, coyotes,and short-tailed and least weasels (Gipson et al.1982). Scientific names of bird and mammal species are listed in Appendices E.E and E.F. (b)Threatened or Endangered Species No threatened or endangered species of wildlife have been recently encountered in the Susitna project area.White (1974)observed two peregrine falcons in 1974 along the Susitna River in the Devil Canyon impoundment area.Kessel et a1.(1982)observed no pere- gnne falcons or other threatened or endangered species during their studies.The potential presence of peregrine falcons is discussed in greater detal I in Section 4.2{c),(i). (c)Species Contributing to Recreation,Subsistence and Commerce. All big game species contribute to recreatlon,and some of big game harvest would appropriately be called subsistence.All the furbearers contribute to some extent to commerce of fur trappers ln the region.Few birds are hunted in the region.In theory, birds contribute to non-consumptive forms of recreation such as bird-watching,but in fact,the area is too remote to attract many people who come solely to see birds. E-3-195 ........_._.._._._--_._----_._--_._------------- Moose,carl bOU,black bears and brown bears are the most abundant big game species and are given highest priority.Sheep,wolves and wolverine are regionally less abundant and are assigned secondary importance.Furbearers are considered less important than big game species.Beavers,marten and muskrat are common enough to be readi ly avai 1able to trappers and have 1imited economic importance.Otter,mink,red faxes,coyotes,lynx,a.nd weasels are given low priority. Birds and small mammals have historically contributed Ilttle to recreation,Subslstence or commerce in the project area.In addition,they each represent a large number of regionally abundant species of which few can be assigned priority over others.As a consequence,each species can receive limited treatment relative to big game and furbearer species with more obvious priorities of importance. E-3-196 - - -- - - ..... - - 4.2 -8aseline Description (a)Bl g Game (i)Moose Studies of moose in the Susitna Basin were conducted in two discrete areas;1)the upper Susitna basin,including all p arts of the watershed upstream of the Devi 1 Canyon dam- site,and 2)the lower Sus it na basin,1 nc Iud 1 ng the major valley of the Susitna River from Devil Canyon downstream to the river mouth at Cook Inlet. Studles in the upper and lower Susltna basln have addressed different aspects of moose ecology.The differences in approach primari ly refl ect the differences in topography and vegetation in each portion of the basin,as well as differences in the development scenarios and potentlal impacts in the two areas.Consequently,comparable infor- mation on moose in all areas of the Susitna basin is not always avallable.The fol lowing dlScusslon of moose ecology in the Susitna basin provides a summary of the current state of knowledge for moose in the upper and lower basins.Similarities and differences in various aspects of moose ecology that may be influenced by the Watana-Devi I Canyon projects Wl II also be discussed. Most of the information contained in the following discus- si on is based on studi es by Ba I lard et a I.(l982a)in the upper Susitna Basin and Modafferi (1982)in the lower Susitna basin.Additional references are cited as neces- sary. Distribution Moose occur throughout the Susitna River drainage and are one of the most economlcallY-lmportant wildlife species in the region.Within the Susitna basin,moose tend to be most abunc;lant oj n the upstream area east of and 1 nc I ud- ing Tsusena and Kosina creeks and within the main Susitna valley downstream of Montana Creek to the river mouth at Cook Inlet.Low numbers of moose appear to presently inhabit the area between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna . .Seasonal Movements Moose in many northern areas undergo regu 1ar seasonal movements or migrations (see LeResche [1974J and Coady [1982J for a revlew).LeResche (1974)described migrations for moose as regular annual movements that i nvo 1ve return to at 1east one common area each year. E-3-197 In some areas such as the North Slope of Alaska (Mould 1979)or northern Minnesota (Van Ball anberghe and Peek 1971)~mlgratory movements may involve distances of only 2-10 km with little change in elevation.Migra- tions in mountalnous areas usually lnvolve large changes in elevation.In interior Alaska,moose spend the summer at low elevation,move to high elevation during fall and early winter,and return to lower elevations during mid-to late winter (Bishop 1969). Horizontal differences between ranges may be as little as 2 km (Knowl ton 1960)or as great as 170 km (Berry 1961).Migration in moose appears to be an adaptation for optimizlng survlval through uti lization of the seasonally most-favorable habitats available (Coady 1982). Weather conditions~particularly snow depth and structure,are one of the most important factors associated with moose migration (Coady 1974,LeResche 19/4).Wlnter severity may also influence the distance moved by individuals as well as the proportion of moose ina popu I at lOn that mi grate to dlft"erent areas.For example,during a winter of low snow in southcentral A1ask a,some groups of moose overwi ntered on summer ranges whi 1e other groups mi grated to adj acent wi nter range (Van Ballenberghe 1977).During winters of deep snow,however,almost allot the moose migrated from the summer range to low elevation winter ranges. In the upper Susltna basln,some groups of moose exhl- blt seasonal shifts in distribution.Other groups undergo very limited seasonal movements and remain in low elevation riparian and forest cOl1lTlunities year- round.Simi 1ar types of mi gratory and non-mi gratory movements have been observed in other moose populations 1n Alaska (LeResche 1974).Ballard et al.(1982a) delineated thirteen subpopulations of moose in the upper Susltna baSln on the baS1S of seasonal movement patterns. Over 2700 radio-locations obtained from 207 moose during the period from October 1976 through August 1981 indicated that Illost Illoose in the upper Susitna basin moved to lower elevations during late sprlng and early summer;mean elevations of relocations for April and May were 785 m and 805 m~respectively.As summer progressed,moose moved to hlgher elevatlons and commonly remained there throughout the winter period. The highest mean elevation of 901 m occurred in December. E-3-198 - - - - - These trends in elevation are quite different from seasona 1 patterns observed duri ng previ ous StUdl es 1 n the upper Susltna and NelchinaRiver basins.Van Ballenberghe (1978)and Ballard and Taylor (1980)both observed that moose tended to occupy areas at 762-914 m elevatlons during the summer and moved to elevations of 548-671 m during the winter.Ballard et al.(1982a) attributed the use of higher elevations by moose during 1980 and 1981 to mild winters,and suggested that high winds and temperature inversions resulted i nreduced snow depths at higher elevations.Browse was conse- quently more accessible in these areas than at lower e Ievat i on areas. Use of regional areas within the upper Susitna basin by moose also appears to be i nfl uenced by slope.Slopes were classified into four broad categories:flat - 0 to 10°,gentle 11 to 30°,moderate 31 to 60°,and steep -61 to 90°.During both summer (May to August)and wi nter (November to Apri 1),91 percent of the moose relocations occurred on flat and gentle slopes.The aspect of the s lope,however,dl d not appear to i nflu- ence moose locations. Detailed information on the distribution of moose in the lower Susitna basin is limited to the current studies being sponsored by the appl icant.In general, ri pari an habl tats are at Ieast seasona I Iy important to moose in all reaches of the lower Susitna River. Winter ranges for moose throughout the lower Susitna baSln are located in rlparlan areas.Riparian communi- ties are also commonly used as calving areas by moose north of Talkeetna,as year-round habitat for moose in the Delta Island area,and as transition range for moose south of Talkeetna.(Moose in the area south of T a I keetna appear to uti Ii ze seasonal ranges on both sides of the river valley.) .Special Use Areas Because movement patterns,cal vi ng areas and breedi ng areas of moose may be traditional (Van Ballenberghe 1977),and because the Susitna project could interfere with use of these sites,it is important to identify special use areas prior to development.Accordingly, portlons of the upstream and downstream moose studies h ave attempted to locate concentrat i on areas duri ng the calving period and the rut. E-3 ...199 Calving Areas.Parturition generally occurred between May 15 and June 15 in the years 1977 to 1980.To determine if calving concentrations occurred in or adjacent to the proposed impoundment areas,al I obser- vations of radlo-co 11 ared cow moose in the upper Sus itna basin between 15 May and 15 June duri ng 1977 to 1980 were assessed.Although th1S method 1ncludes some cows which were not observed with calves,it does provide locations of areas where cows probably calve. (This error is likely small because calf mortality immediately following birth is high [Ballard and Taylor 198U,Ballard et al.1981J and many parturient cows would consequently not be observed with calves.) Cow moose were distributed throughout the upper Sus1tna bas1n but several concentrations of radio-collared cow moose were observed.These included:Coal Creek and its tri butari es;the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of the Tyone River downstream toa point several miles downstream from Cl arence Lake Creek;Jay Creek to Watana Creek;the area in the vicinity of the mouths of Deadman and Tsusena creeks;Fog Creek to Stephan Lake; and oppos 1te Fog Creek to Devi I Creek.Low shrub and open spruce habitats were the most common cover types in the vicinity of these concentrations.The impor- tanceof these sites as traditional calving areas is not known. Within the lower Susitna basin,calv1ng concentrations north of Talkeetna occurred in cover types different from those used south of Talkeetna.Rad i o-co 11 ared females in the area north of lalkeetna generally moved to riparian or island habitats during the calving peri ode Cottonwood was the predomi nant cover type in the vicinity of most relocations during the calving period. In contrast,radio-collared cow moose 1n the Susltna valley south of lalkeetna generally left the over- wintering riparian areas by late April and did not return to these areas unti I well after the calving penod.A possible calving concentration was observed in the vicinity of Trapper Lake but most cow moose were widely dispersed at varying distances from the Susitna River.On average~cow moose were located 14.7 km from the rlver during the calv1ng period.However,several females calved on the river islands and remained there throughout the year.Cow moose 1n the area south of Ta I keet na were genera 11 y observed in cover types more typical of calving habitat in other areas of Alaska (e.g.,Rausch 1958;Bailey and Bangs 1980);a mosaic of spruce and alders interspersed with muskeg bog meadows was the most common cover type near relocat1ons. E-3-200 .,." - - - .- - A common feature of calving habitats in the lower Susitna basin is their close proximity to water. Although the presence of'water may be an important attribute of calving sites,it is more likely that cow moose seek these areas because of the avai 1abi 1ity of newly-growing herbaceous vegetation (LeResche and Davis 1973;Modafferi 1982).Such vegetatlon would provlde lactatlng cows and newborn calves with a readily- available source of easily digestible,highly nutri- tious forage (Weeks and Klrkpatrlck 1976;Fraser et al. 1980). Avoi ding predation (Ball ard et al.1980)or insect harassment (Mould 1979)may be a secondary considera- tion to forage availability in the selection of calving sites.Open muskeg areas would provlde rellef from insect harassment because of air movement,but air movement also may carry moose scent to predators such as black or brown bears or wolves.The reJatlve open- ness also negates concealment from predators.Riparian habitats which are less open than muskeg would afford little relief from insect harassment but would provide cons i derab ly more concealment from predators and decrease the amount of wlndborn scent. Breeding Areas.Breeding concentrations in the upper Susitna basln were determlned by assessing the loca- tions of all radio-collared cow moose between 20 September and 20 October during 1977 to 1980.Most cow moose occupied upland sites away from the proposed impoundment areas.Concentrations occurred in the fol [owwg areas:Coal Creek to the big bend in the Susitna River,Cl arence Lake,upl ands between Watana and Jay Creeks,Stephan Lake to Fog Lake,and the uplands above the mouth of Tsusena Creek.Other concentrat i on areas away from the proposed impoundments include northwestern Alphabet Hills,the Maclaren River,and the area above the mouth of Valdez Creek. In the lower Susitna basln,tew moose were observed in riparian habitats during the breeding period.With the exception of moose that remained in riparian commUnl- tles or on the rlver lsJands throughout the year,most moose were located farther from the Susitna River during the rut than during the calving period.Cow and bull moose were located on average 15.5 km and 24.8 km, respectively,from the rlver.Use of speciflc cover types durlng the breeding period was not assessed. E-3-201 .River Crossings Because the impoundments ot the Watana and Devil Canyon dams may create a barrier to local or seasonal move- ments of moose,it is important to determi ne where moose commonly cross the Susitna River in the vicinity of the proposed impoundments and the importance of these crosslng sltes as traditionally-used areas. Between October 1976 and December 1981,33 radio- co 11 ared moose made a ml nlmum of 73 cross 1ngs of the upper Susitna River.Of 40 river crossings by radio- co 11 ared animal s duri ng 1980-1981,all occurred duri ng the months of May through November.Di stri but ions of the crossings were:May -20%,June -7.5%;July - 12.0%,August -12.0%,September -20%,October - 12.5%,and November -10%. Track surveys on 24 March 1981 provided observations of an addltional /3 crosslngs ot the Susltna 1{1ver by moose.Based on both cross ings by radi o-co 11 ared ani- ma1s and on track sightings,crossings of the Susitna River occurred throughout the proposed impoundment areas.However,crossings tended to be concentrated in several major areas along the Susitna River;these inc 1uded the mouth of Fog Creek downstream to"an area near Stephan Lake,from the mouth at"Ueadman Creek upstream for approximately 5 miles,Watana to Jay Creeks,and from Goose Creek to Clearwater Creek.The relative importance of these "major crossing areas, particularly during seasonal migrations,is not known. I ntormat i on on movements ot"radi o-co 11 ared moose in the upper Susitna basin between October 1976 and mid-August 1981 suggest that some of the above crosslng concentra- tions may be associated with migratory movements.In genera 1,movement patterns of most moose approx imated the drainage pattern of creeks and tri butari es of the mainstem rivers.Consequently,most movements in the upper Susitna basin involve a north-south movement pattern.Crossing sites for these general ized move- ments that occurred with in the proposed impoundment areas lnclude the lower portion of Watana Creek,the Jay-Kosina creeks area,and the movement corridor along the Susitna River. -Habitat Use .Cover Requirements Because moose are large Iy dependent on woody browse during winter and late spring,their distributions are more closely associated with the distrlbutlon of E-3-202 - ." ""'" - - - ....I commonly-utilized browse species than with other envi- ronmental factors (Coady 1982).However,the minimum requirements of moose for winter food and cover appear to be satisfied by a great diversity of habitat types across North Amer1ca,suggesting that moose are adapt- able to a variety of conditions. Habitat use by moose is most extensive during the summer and fall and 1S gradually restricted during the winter (LeResche et a1.1974).Lowland and upland climax shrub communities are heavily utilized during summer and fall.By early winter,moose commonly move to upland and lowland sera1 communities.During w1nters of deep snow,upland sera1 communities are abandoned in favor of lowland areas. In western North America,shrub communit1es are the most important winter habitats for moose (LeResche et a1.1974).In particular,riparian willow (Salix sp.) stands provide high quality winter range (however, moose highly prefer some species of willow over others).Max1mum use of these areas occurs during mid- to late-winter and during severe winters.Areas of coniferous forests adjacent to riparian commun1t1es provi de bedd 1ng areas and cover and so enhance the value of these shrublands for moose. Riparian communities are perhaps the most important shrub habitats for moose (Coady 1982).Because ripar- i an areas are self-renewing through alll.Jvial action, they provide permanent seral habitats.Important seral shrub habitat is also created by fire,clear-cutting, and other d1 sturbances that remove climax vegetat i on cover (LeResche et al.1974,Davis and Franzmann 1979). However,because moose avoid large clear-cut areas (Hamilton and Drysdale 1975),widesca1e removal of mature forest cover can result 1n a reduct10n of moose habitat,despite the increase in shrub growth.Follow- ing fire in Alaska,the optimum age of browse growth is I ess than 5U years and moose ut 1 Ii zat i on of these areas usually peaks 20-25 years after burning (LeResche et a1.1974). Site-specific information on habitat use .by moose in the Upper and lower Susitna basin was based on aerial assessments of the dominant vegetat10n species in the v1cinity of each moose relocation.Although this method of evaluating habitat use provided some informa- tion on the relatlVe 1mportance of different forest cover types,two problems were apparent. £-3-203 The first problem is associated with diurnal differ- ences in habitat use by moose.Linkswiler (1982) showed that habitat use by moose 1n Denal;National Park w'as strongly associated with the time of day.In general,it appeared that moose rested in forested areas dunng the day and became act1ve 1n more open cover types during the early morning and evening. Observations of habitat use in the Susitna basin conse- quently may not accurately reflect the importance of some habitats to moose for activities such as feed1ng or nurs 1ng,except dun ng the wi nter when habitat use 1S not greatly influenced by time of day. The second prob I em associ ated wi th the assessment ot moose habitat use during aerial surveys is that over- story cover types may not accurately reflect habitat components,such as browse avai 1abil ity,that strong'ly influence use by moose.For example,Ballard et al. (1982a)i nd1 cated that the upper Sus itna and Ne 1chi na river basins contain approximately 24 species of willow (Salix sp.),yet moose cOlTR11only utll1ze only several species of willow as browse (Wolff 1976).Because the distributions of willows and other shrubs are not directly related to forest cover types,assessments of habitat use by moose on the basis of forest cover types 1S probably m1sleading.rurther studies of habitat use that measure variables important to moose are needed. Habitat Use in the Upper Susitna Basin.Spruce cover types were the areas most frequent ly used by radi 0- collared moose in the upper Susitna basin during the penod Uctober 19/6 to August 1981,w1th sparse-and med1um-density,medium-height black spruce comprising 35 percent of the total observations.Assuming that Linksw1ler 1 s (198,)results apply to the Susitna basin, these habitats likely represent bedding or resting habitats.The combined areas of conifer forest and shrubland account for only 59 percent of the total area in the upper Susitna basin,but based on the aerial surveys,received over 90 percent of the year-round use by moose. Moose use of upland shrub habitats corresponded closely wlth observed elevational movements of moose in this part of the Susitna basin.Moose were rarely observed in upland shrub habitats just prior to calving in April when they tended to be at low elevations.Use of the upland shrUb hab1tat 1ncreased dunng the summer and peaked in October when 43 percent of all moose observed were in upland shrub habitat.High proportions ot moose were observed 1n upland shrub habitat throughout the winter.As discussed earl ier,the high E-3-204 ~I K.lfiil!il. ~, - - """ ,~ - use of this cover type during the winter is likely the result of mild winter conditions and consequently may not accurately represent moose hab1tat atfinities dur1ng more severe winters. During calving in May,moose in the upper Susitna basin were most common Iy observed 1n sp ar se-to-med i um- density,medium-height spruce habitats.These lower elevation habitats may be selected by parturient females because of the availability of escape cover and the early green-up of the vegetation.Habitats such as birch,alder and dense spruce cover types were not commonly used during the calving period. Habitat Use in the Lower Susitna Basin.Habitat affi- nities of moose in the lower Susitna basin differed among the areas south of and north of Talkeetna and,in some cases,appeared to be influenced by both the se~ of the anima I and the season.Because these resu lts are based on a relatively small number of relocations for a small number of moose,d1tterences 1n hab1tat use among male and female moose and among seasons may not be significant. During mid-March to mid-October 1981 (the sample period for all relocations in the lower Susitna study area), male moose (N=2)north ot"Talkeetna were most often observed in non-riparian.communities dominated by alder,birch and/or spruce cover.Neither of these animalS were observed in riparian communities.In contrast,most femal e moose north of Ta 1keetna were observed in riparian communities during the calving period.Cottonwood,alder,and wi llow were the domi- nant cover types at most relocat1on sltes.Uuring the summer period,most females in this area utilized non-ri pari an habitats,pri mar i ly those domi nated by alder,blrch and/or spruce.Females tended to remain in non-riparin communities during the breeding period and were most common in areas dominated by alder, sedge/grasses and/or spruce. Male and female moose in the area south of Talkeetna were observed most ot"ten in non-ri pari an commun it i es characterized by alder,birch and/or spruce habitats. Dur1ng the calv1ng per1od,cow moose tended to utilize b;rch and sprlJce cover types most,whereas duri ng the summer and breeding period,birch,spruce and alder cover types were used frequently. E-3-205 Twenty percent of the observat ions of females in the southern portlon Of the lower basin were in riparian habitats where alder,birch,spruce and/or cottonwood were the predomlnant cover types • .Food Habits Moose are primarily browsers,feeding predominantly on deciduous woody browse during winter months and on emergent and herbaceous pl ants as we 11 as 1eaves and leaders of shrubs and trees during the summer (see Peek 1974 for a revlew).Food habits of moose are strongly influenced by browse availability and,as a result,it is diftlcult to summarlze food habits for moose within large regional areas.In particular,moose feeding habits appear to change in relation to the species composition and relative abundance of browse in differ- ent habitats or within simi I ar habltats ot-varying successional stages (Coady 1982).Snow depths and densities can also influence browse availability and, in turn,Utl Ilzation of browse by moose (Coady 1974). Data on browse availability and browse utilization for the upper Susitna basin are now being analyzed,but are probably similar to those from other areas in interior Alaska.Rumen content ana lyses ot-moose trom the Fairbanks area indicated that moose depended on a diet of primari ly deciduous woody pl ants (Cushwa and Coady 1976).W"IIIOW,paper birch,trembl ing aspen,and alder,in decreas i ng order,were the most frequent ly consumed browse species.Wolff (1976)observed a preference by moose in the Tanana River valley for willows and balsam poplar.lJlets ot moose ln the upper Susitna basin may be similar to moose in the Fairbanks area except that trembling aspen is not readily avai 1- able in the upper Susltna va~ley. Chatelaine (1951)examined rumen contents of moose obtained from kills along the Alaska railway and from hunter kills in the lower Susitna valley in the Talkeetna-Houston area.Wi llows,.paper blrch,cotton- wood,and trembling aspen constituted most of the winter diet.Shrubs such as alder,wild rose,and high-bush cranberry were rarely consumed.A similar analysis by Shepherd (1958)also indicated that the winter diet of moose in the lower Susitna valley was composed primarily of willows,paper birch and trembl- i ng aspen.However,because both of these stud 1 es involved moose from non-riparian habitats at some dis- tance from the Susitna River,they probably do not accurately reflect the dlets of moose overwlnterlng in E-3-206 - \~ - - r1parian communities and on river islands in the Susitna River.In particular~trembling aspen is not present in riparian communities and so would be unavai lab 1e to moose as a wi nter forage. Browse ava1 Iab1 11ty and ut1 Iization measurements were obtained from a number of riparian sample sites along the Sus itna Ri ver dun ng 1980 (Arneson 1981).Five browse species were considered:willows,balsam pop- lar,paper birch~highbush cranberry~and wild rose.A mean of 1.4 browse pl ants/m2 was recorded for all habitat types in the Susitna River valley between Portage Creek and the Delta Islands.Browse species were most utilized in equisetum/willow and medium-tall poplar/willow/alder habitats and least utilized in medium-dense climax poplar/spruce and sparse-climax birch/spruce. Percent utilization of willow and poplar was greatest in habitats where they occurred less frequently.Birch was seldom found on floodpla1n hab1tats,but where it occurred near the river,it was well uti 1 ized (26.9%). Highbush cranberry and rose were found most Iy 1n tall or cl1max habitats but were less abundant than willows. Utilization of highbush cranberry·and rose was also less than willows. General observations indicated that alder was seldom browsed by moose but in some localities a small alder clump cou 1dbe heavily browsed.Some islands with high qual ity browse were not used by moose every winter; moose sign on some 1slands 1nd1cated heavy use in the past but no use during the winter of 1979-1980 . .Home Ranges Moose population studies in both the upper and lower Susitna Basins involved biotelemetry assessment of local and seasonal movements and home ranges.A considerable volume of information on home range loca- tions,sizes and distance relationships to the proposed impoundments or river channel was obtained.The following discussion of home ranges will concentrate on the numbers of home ranges that may be potenti ally affected by the impoundments in the upper Susitna basin and by mod1f1cat1on of nparian communities in the lower Susitna basin. The Upper Susitna Basin.To determine the number of moose that seasonally and annually occupy areas within or immediately adjacent to the impoundment areas, Ballard et al.(1982a)delineated a 28.7 km zone (the average length of the annual home ranges of 162 rad10- ;:-3-207 collared moose in the upper Susitna bas1n for which 4 or more observat ions had been made duri ng 1980-1981) around the impoundment area.Based on total home range po lygons for 168 radi o-co 11 ared moose,Ball ard et a 1. (1982a)found that 19 had home ranges that fell outside the 28.7 km zone.Of the 149 moose with home range polygons either partially or entirely within this zone, 79 moose had home range polygons which were either partly or entirely contained within an area that encom- passed the proposed impoundments and an arbitrari 1y- selected 8 km wide zone adjacent to the impoundment. Based on an estimate of 4500 moose for the upper Sus itna bas in,up to 2402 moose may have home ranges that completely or partly overlap the proposed impound- ment area and the area within 8 kill of the impoundment. A number of problems concerning equal catchabi1ity of animals,sampling intensity,and emigration/immigration of animals adm1ttedly may bias the results of the above analysis (see Ballard et al.1982a).However,the analysis does provide an approximation of the number of moose that coul d concei vab ly be affected by the pro- posed impoundments and facilities. Lower Susitna Basin.The concern for moose in the lower Sus itna bas in that has been most common ly expressed is that altered water levels in the Susitna River may result in changes in the species composition, density,vigor and quality of riparian habitats.In- formation from the present moose biotelemetry studies in the lower Sus1tna baS1n 1S not adequate to reliably assess the number of moose that may be affected by changes in riparian corrmunities. Moose in the area upstream of Talkeetna and on the west side of the river were commonly relocated either within the river downstream of Talkeetna (i.e.,river islands) or within 1.6 km of the rlver (most of this area would presumably be riparian communities)(Table W30).In contrast,moose on the eastside of the river downstream from Talkeetna did not commonly frequent the ri ver or riparian areas.However,because of small samples,the above use patterns shaul d be consi dered prelim;nary. Biotelemetry studies of moose in these riparian commun- ities are continuing,so that the number of moose po- tentially influenced by these changes can be better assessed. -Population Characteristics .Historical Population Trends Although moose population studies specific to much of the upper Susitna basin were not initiated until the E-3-208 - .,' - - 1ate 1970·s,the Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game has been conducting annual aerial censuses in Game Manage- ment Unit (GMU)13 since 1955.Portions of GMU 13, speclt'lcaf Iy Count Area (CA)6,CA 7 and CA 14,occur partly or entirely within the upper Susitna River basin (Figure W6).Historical descriptions of moose populations within GMU 13 are provided by Rausch (1969),Bishop and Rausch (1974),McIlroy (1974),and Ballard and Taylor (1980). During th~lY~U's,moose populations in GMU 13 increa- sed rapidly and reached high densities about 1960. After the severe winter of 1961-1962,the popul ation declined and continued to decline with severe winters occurring in 1965-66,1970-71, 1971-72,and 1978-79. Fall cow-calf ratios,as well as several other indices of population productivity declined sharply and reached a record low for the basin in 1975.Sex and age compo- sition data for CA 7 and CA 14 have basically exhibited the same patterns described for the unit.Since 1975, the moose population appears to have increased slightly or remained stable even though calf survival has remained relatively low . .Population Estimates -Upper Susitna Basin In order to obtai'n accurate estimates of moose popul a- tion sizes in portions of the upper Susitna basin, Ball ard et al.(1982a)intensively surveyed CA 7 and CA 14 during 5-8 November 1980.Moose populations in all portions of the upper basin were not surveyed because of deteriorating snow conditions and the high costs of intensively surveying such a large area. During the aerial surveys of CA 7 and CA 14,a total of 743 moose w~re observed withln 26 sample areas compris- ing 948 km,or an equivalent of 39 percent of the two count areas combined. Table W31 summarizes the calculations utilized to estimate the fall moose population in CAls 7 and 14 east of Jay and Kosina 2creeks during the late winter 1980.Of the 2447 km census area,35 percent was classified as low moose density,38 percent as medium moose density and 27 percent as high moose density. Based upon census data,each stratification was estimate~to contain the following number of moose/km low -2.91,medium -4.78,and high -9.65. The estimated total fall popUlation for CAls 7 and 14 was 1986 +371 (90%CI). E-3-209 Bee ause a 11 moose wou 1d not be observed at a survey intensity of 1.7 minutes/km 2 ,portions of 10 sample areas were random Iy chosen and were resurveyed at ~ sampling intensity of approximately 4.6 minutes/km in an effort to generate a s1ghtab1 11ty correct 1on factor.Based on comparisons of total moose counts during both sets of surveys,it was estimated that 98 percent of the moose were observed during the fi rst s urv eys,yi e 1ding a correct i on f actor of 1.03.The corrected popu IatlOn estimate for GA 7 and GA 14 was 2046!382 (90%GI),of which 22 percent were calves. Ballard et al.(1982a)were unable to 1ntenslVely cen- sus the portion of the upper Susitna study area west of De 1us i on and Kos i na creeks because of deteri orat i ng snow conditions,but a rough estimate of moose numbers in this area was obtained during a short survey on 29 November 198U.Stratification of the survey area indi- cated that of the 2150 km 2 considered,1456 km 2 were claSS1f1ed as low dens1ty,663 km 2 as medium density,and 31 km 2 as high density moose areas. Based on this stratification,a crude population esti- mate of 1151 moose was obtained. Similar calculations to those described above were used to estimate the number of moose in GA 6.Population estimates for this area were derived separately because a migratory group of moose 1S known to overwinter near the mouth of the Oshetna River.During the survey on 9 November 1980,a total of 205 moo~e were observed.Of the 1217 km 2 stratified,528 km were classified as low moose ,density,536 km 2 as medium moose dens1ty, and 103 km 2 as high moose density areas.If it is assumed that the moose stratum densities in GAls 7 and 14 are equ1valent to those in GA 6,a rough estimte of 830 animals is obtained.The estimated number of moose in the upper Susitna basin study area,excluding the far southeastern port i on of the drainage,was 4027 during November 1980. Because of cost constra1nts and deteriorating snow conditions,no population estimates were obtained for a number of areas in the eastern port 1on of the upper Susitna basin (the western Alphabet Hills,the Lake Louise flats,and the Tyone and Sanona Greek drain- ages)• .Population Estimates:Lower Susitna Basin Estimates of moose density in the lower Susitna basin are based on six aerial surveys conducted only in E-3-210 -i - - riparian communities within four zones along the lower Susitna River (Figure W?)(Modafferi 1982,unpub1. data).Surveys were flown in early December 1981 and early Apri 1 1982.Because estimates are expressed as moose per river km,they are not equivalent to estimates for the upper Susitna basin (e.g., moose/h a). Ouri ng the six ·surveys,an average of 267 moose were observed per survey (range of 82 to 309).Estimates of moose densities (Table W32)indicate that moose were generally most abundant along"the Susitna River during early March.During all surveys,moose densities were cons i stent1y higher downstream of Montana Creek than between Devil Canyon and Montana Creek . •Population Structure Upper Susitna Basin.Information on the population structure ot moose 1n a portion of the upper Susitna basin (GMU 13)is available since 1955;summaries of a number of population ratios such as cow:ca1f ratios and sex ratios are summarized for CA 6,CA 7 and CA 14 in Tables W33 to W35.In all three counts areas,the n umber of males per 100 females has dec 1i ned substantially Slnce 19!)5.Similar declines in the number of small (presumably young)moose,calves and twin calves per 100 females also have been observed. These consistent declines suggest that moose productivity in the upper Susitna valley has declined over the past 25 years.Recent dec 1i nes in product1vity have been attributed largely to brown bear predation of young calves (Ballard and Spraker 1979, Ballard et al.1980,Ballard et al.1981); Lower Susitna Basin.Information on the sex and age composition of moose in the lower Susitna basin was obta1ned dur1ng the surveys described earlier for popu- 1at i on est i mates.Because compos it i on surveys in the upper Susitna basin only included information during the late fall of each year,only sex and age composi- tion data from the first survey in the lower Susitna basin (9-10 December 1981)wi 11 be considered (Tab le W36).Males tended to be less abundant than females and with the excepti on of Zone I II (Montana Creek to the Yentna River),numbers of male moose per 100 females did not appear to differ greatly among zones. The estimates shown,however,may not be accurate because some antler1ess males may have been classified as females.Compari son s of the number of calves per 100 females for the lower Susitna basin (48.8)and the upper Susitna basin (32.2;based on estimates from the census surveys)suggest that moose populations in the lower Susitna basin may be slightly more productive than moose in the upper basin. E-3-211 ·Mortality Factors Moose populations in several areas of Alaska,including GMU 13 (which includes part of the upper Susitna basin) have undergone population declines in recent years (McIlroy 1976).A series of several severe winters during the 1970 l s was believed to have resulted in these declines,and low annual recruitment associated primarily with poor calf survival prior to November has been suggested as the predominant factor maintaining these populations at low levels (Ballard et al.1980). Predation of moose calves by wolves and brown bear is believed to be the most important factor contributing to low calf survival.Other factors such as decreasing range quality,low bull:cow ratios,and periodic severe winters are thought to be less important influences on calf survival (McIlroy 1974). Intensive studies of moose populations in the Nelchina River basin were undertaken by the Alaska Department of Fish and game during the mid-1970 I s to determine which factors were most important in determining calf survi- val.Studies by Van Ballenberghe (1978)and Ballard and Taylor (1978)suggested that bull:cow ratios were not a major influence on population productivity. Several measures of physical condition of moose also suggested that moose in the Nelchina basin were in good physical condition and that deteriorating range condi- tions were not a problem (Franzmannand LeResche 1978). Furthermore,artificial reductions in wolf populations' resulted in no large increases in calf survival sugges- ting that although moose were an important component of wo lves I diets,wo 1f predat i on on moose was not a maj or factor in declining productivity (Ballard and Spraker 1979).What became apparent,however,was that brown bear predation of young moose calves was a major source of calf mortality (Ballard and Taylor 1978,Spraker and Ballard 1979).A recent study of moose calf mortality in the Nelchina basin (Ballard et ale 1980)showed that of 136 calves radio-collared shortly after parturition, 55 percent di ed of natural causes by the fo 11 owi ng November.Brown bear predation of moose calves accounted for 79 percent of the natural deaths. Mortality of newborn moose calves in the upper Susitna basin during 1980 and 1981 was high.By 1 August 1980, 23 (77%)of the calves were missing.Rates of 1980 calf loss were compared with those observed in 1977 and 1978 (Figure W8).Although causes of moose calf mor- tality were not determined in 1980,the pattern of loss was quite similar to that observed in GMU 13 during 1977 and 1978 where predation by brown bear accounted for a high proportion of the natural calf deaths (Ballard et al.1981). E-3-212 - - """ Calf mortality was not directly monitored during 1981 but indices of calf product10n suggest that brown bear predat10n may again have accounted for a large propor- t ion of the natural deaths.Of the 46 sexually mature cow moose Wh1Ch could have produced calves,only 20 (43.5%)were observed with calves;four (20%)produced twins ..The calving rate for known producers was 1.2 calves/cow.Of the 24 known calves,14 (58.3%)were miss1ng by 2S July.Th1S pattern of calt'loss is again quite similar to that of 1977, 1978,and 1980.when predation by bears accounted for most of the losses. Although predation by brown bears does appear to be the major cause of calf moose mortal ity during the summer and fall periods,winter severity is likely an impor- tant factor in determining productivity and survlVal. Ba I lard et a I.(1981)found that snow depths from the Monahan Fl ats area was si gni fi cant ly corre 1ated wi th 'subsequent fal I calt':cow ratios in CA 3 of GMU 13. During the period from 1970 to 1978,45 percent of the variation in cow:calf ratios could be attributed to snow depth.Assumi ng that snow depths are an adequate index of w1nter sever1ty,the strong relationship between cow:ca lf rat i os and snow depths sllggest that over-winter conditions and their influence on the con- dition of pregnant cows are an important factor in determining calf survival,and hence,population pro- ductivity.As discussed earlier,winters during the two years.of study of moose popu I at 1ons 1 n the upper Sus1tna valley have been mi 1d.Consequently,it has not been possible to obtain site-specific information on the influence of severe winter conditions on popula- tion productivity,habitat use,or browse utilization. Information on mortality rates of adult moose in the Susitna basin is limited.Ballard and Taylor (1980) exam1ned mortal1ty rates of adult females based on the loss of radio-tagged cows in the upper Susitna basin dur ing 19/6-19/5.Dun ng the three-year study they estimated that annual adult cow mortality averaged 6 percent. Because only two years of data from ongoing moose studies in the lower Susitna basin is available,infor- mation on natural mortal1ty is limited.During popu 1at i on censuses conducted during December 1981, January 1982 and February 19S2,the percentage of calves 1n the population declined consistently.It is not know,however,if the decline in the percentage of calves was the result of calf mortality or redistribu- tion of age and sex classes of moose in the stUdy area (e.g.,an 1nflux of Older animals from adjacent winter- ing areas).No instances of predation of calves or E-3-213 adult moose were observed durlng 1981 or early 1982. Modafferi (1982)suggests,however,that most predation which does occur in the lower Susitna basin is probably att ri butab 1e to brown bears and black bears.80th specles of bear occur throughout the lower Susltna bas i n,whereas wolves,another major predator of some moose populations,are rare. Dispersal Limited evidence obtained during the radio-tracking program suggest that young moose from the upper Susitna basin may disperse into other major drainages in the region.One male calf was observed to move 75 km from Swimming Bear Lake to Coal Lake.Another ·male calf moved from near the mouth of Watana Creek to the upper reaches of Wlndy and Clearwater creeks north of the Dena 1 i Hi ghway. Th is i nformat i on suggests that moose popu 1at ions in other drai nages removed from the Su s itna drai nage may be partly dependent on the immigration of Susltna moose.Information on population sizes in the Susitna basin during 1980 and 1981 similarly suggest that a portion of the lncrease in numbers of adult moose may have been the result of immigration from other areas. During 1980,178 calves and 766 adults were observed in CA 7.In 1981,a total of 1006 adults were observed. Even lfall of the 198U calves had survived (which is unlikely),the increase is 21.1 percent greater than expected.Although sampling errors might account for a major portion of this difference,immigration from adj acent areas may part 1y exp 1a;n th is increase in adult moose. Evidence from moose studies in areas adjacent to the lower Susltna baSln suggest that the lower Susitna population is discrete from those in adjacent drain- ages.Moose tagging studies in the Matanuska River val ley (Rausch 1971)and in the Peter-Dutch Hills (Didrickson and Taylor 1978)found that emigration from these areas to the Susitna basin was extremely low to nil.Recent studies of moose in the lower Susltna baSln (Modafferl 1982)have not yet obtained sufficent data to adequately examine dispersal of moose from the reglon. (11)Caribou Caribou in the area affected by the proposed Susitna hydro- electric project are members of the Nelchina herd.This herd,one of 22 herds in Al aska (Davi s 1978),is important E-3-214 - ,~ I""'" I I, '"'" - - to sport and subsistence hunters because of its size and proximity to population centers in southcentral Alaska. Currently,the Nelchina herd contains about 21,000 animals (approximately 6%of the total statewi~e caribou population of 325,000). Despite the great interest by hunters in harvesting Nelchina caribou (6,662 applications for 1600 permits in 1981),the range remains relatively inaccessible.Human development is largely limited to the peripheries and con- S1StS primarily of the Alaska Railroad,Parks Highway, Denali Highway,Richardson Highway,Trans-Alaska Pipeline, and Glenn Highway. Caribou studies for the Susitna project were conducted by Pitcher (1982).All data ln thlS section not otherwise cited were obtained from that source. -Distribution and Movement Patterns The Nelchina herd occupies an area of approximately 51,800 km 2 bounded by four mountain ranges:the Al aska Range to the north,the Wrangell Mountains on the east, the Chugach Mountalns to the south,and the Talkeetna Mountains to the west (Hemming 1971).The Nelchina range contains a variety of habltats,from spruce-covered low- 1ands to steep,barren mountains. The Nelchina herd has been studied by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service since 1948,and by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.UUrlng thlS tlme,lt has remained essentially within the area outlined above;however,with the exception of the calving area,seasonal use of parti- cular areas has varied. Early records indicate that the herd wintered (January to March)in the upper Nenana River area in the early 1930·s and in the Ta"lkeetna Mountains in the late 1930's (Skoog 1968).From 19~U -1955 the herd wi ntered from the Llttle Nelchina River and Glennallen Highway north through the Lake LOUl se flats to the Denal i Hi ghway.As the herd increased in size through the later 1950's and early 1960's,its winter range also increased in size, encompassing the upper Nenana River area,Monahan flats, Talkeetna Mountalns and extending east across the Richardson Highway (Hemming 1971).The most recent studies,of radio-collared caribou in 1981 and 1982, lndicate that the main portion of the herd wintered (I) on the Lake Louise flats and the middle·portion of the Gakona and Chistochina River drainages,and (2)in the western foothllis of the Alphabet Hills,areas distant from the proposed impoundment (Pi tcher 1982 pers. comm.). Since 1949,the fi rst year for whi ch records are avai 1- able,Nelchina caribou have utilized an area of about E-3-215 1,000 mi 2 in the northern Talkeetna'j~ountains for calv- ing (Skoog 1968,Hemming 1971,Bos 1974).Although the precise areas used have varied,calving has taken place between Fog Lakes and the Little Nelchina River between about 3,000 and 4,500 feet elevation.The only devia- tions have been during years with extremely heavy snow accumulations when some calving took place during the migration to the traditional calving grounds (Lentfer 1965,Skoog 1968,Bos 1973).In 1980 and 1981 calving took place between May 15 and June 10 in the drainages of Kosina Creek,Goose Creek,Black River and Oshetna River (Figure W9)(Pitcher 1982). The primary migratory route in 1980 and 1981 from winter range on the Lake Louise flats to the calving grounds in the eastern Talkeetna Mountains was westward across the flats from Crosswind Lake and Lake Louise into the Talkeetna Mountains on a front from Lone Butte to Kosina Creek. It appeared that many animals used the frozen Susitna River between the Oshetna River and Kosina Creek as a t rave 1 route in the spri ng of 1981.In the spri ng of 1980 one radio-collared animal,and presumably also a smal"J portion of the main herd,moved south and crossed the Susitna River near the mouth of Deadman Creek.Many animals historically used this route to the calving grounds after wintering in upper Susitna-Nenana drainages (Skoog 1968). During spring migration and calving there is some segre- gation of sex and age groups.Although yearlings and barren cows 1ag somewhat behind parturient cows,they also move to the calving area,remaining scattered along its periphery (Skoog 1968).Radio-collared Nelchina bullS were found in a wide variety of locations,mostly in transit to summer ranges during calving in 1980 and 1981 (Pitcher 1982). Historically,the female-calf segment of the Nelchina herd has summered primari ly in two areas:the eastern Talkeetna Mountains and across the Susitna River in the Brushkana,Butte,Deadman,Watana,Jay,and Coal creeks complex (Skoog 1968,Hemming 1971).In most years between 1950 and 1973,varying proportions of the female- calf segment (ranging from 0-100%)crossed the Susitna River from the calving grounds to the summer range on the north slde of the river.The female-calf segment of the Nelchina herd spent the summer period (June 11 through July 31)of both 1980 and 1981 in the northern and eastern slopes of the Talkeetna Mountai ns.Summeri ng radio-coll ared males were found in many locations in the high country of the Nelchina basin. E-3-216 - - - - ~, - In both 1980 and 1981,autumn (August 1 through September 31)was a time of considerable movement and dispersal by both cows and bu 11 s.Compared to the obv i ous segreg at i on in June and July,it appeared that considerable mingling of the sexes occurred.In mi d-to 1 ate August 1980 a portion of the main summering concentrations moved out of the Talkeetna Mountains onto the western portion of the Lake Louise flats,and in some cases,into the Alphabet Hills.Through September,the distribution remained relatively stable,with the main herd divided between the northeastern Talkeetna Mountains,the Lake Louise flats, and the Alphabet Hills. Hlstorically,Nelchina caribou have rutted in a number of locations;however,the Lake Louise flats and the eastern Talkeetna Mountains have been the most widely used.The Deadman Lake area was also used extensively during the rut in many of the years when major segments of the herd summered in the area.During both 1980 and 1981,consi- derab 1e movement from west to east occurred duri ng the rut.In both years,a portion of the herd was in the eastern foothills of the Talkeetna Mountains in early October,but by mi d-October,most animals were on the northern Lake Loui se fl ats.In 1980,a small group remained in the Sl ide Mountain area.In 1981,on the other hand,a third to a half of the herd had crossed the Richardson Highway and Trans-Alaska Pipeline by 10 October. -Subherds Eide (1980)suspected that subherds with separate calving areas existed in several areas of the Nelchina range.He based this conjecture on reports of sightings of groups with young calves in these locations during all seasons including the calving period.Locations of these pos- sible subherds were the Watana Creek Hills (upper Sus i tna-Nenana drainages),the upper Tal keetna Ri ver, Chunilna Hills,Alaska Range and Gakona River.The first three of these suspected subherds use areas fairly close to the proposed impoundments and several caribou in each were radio-collared by Pitcher (1982).Relocations of these animals are shown in Figure W10. The resident subherd in the Upper Susitna-Nenana area (Figure WID)was estimated in 1981 to contain about 1000 caribou;however,the situation is confounded by move- ments of animals from the main Nelchina herd through the area and by use of the area by summeri ng bu 11 s from the main herd.Pitcher (pers.comm)censused the caribou E-3-217 population in October 1982 for the area north and west of the Susitna River above Gold Creek)including the Clear- water Mountai ns.The western and northern boundaries were the Parks Highway and the Al aska Range.Five days were required to complete the census because of periods of bad weather,and thus caribou movements during the census may have comp 1i cated the counts.Also,about 10% of the main Nelchina herd moved through the southeastern port i on of the census area,further comp 1i cat i ng the data.Pitcher estimated that 2500 caribou were in the count area,based on an actual count of 2077 caribou and his subjective impressions of sightability and area coverage. DUrlng early May 1980,four adult females and one adult male were radio-collared from this subherd.One of the females migrated to the main Nelchina calving area, summered in the Talkeetna Mountains,migrated back through the upper Susitna-Nenana area in the fall,and rejoined the main Nelchina herd on the Lake Louise Flat during the rut and early winter.The other three females remained in the upper Susitna-Nenana area throughout the study period,producing two calves in 1980 and two in 1981.The bull summered in the Cl earwater Mountains, then joined the main Nelchina herd during the rut on the Lake Louise flats. The Chunilna Hills group appears to be a resident subherd numbering fewer than 340 animals.One radio-collared bull remained in the Chunilna Hills from April to November 1980 when it shed its collar.Two females were collared in the spring of 1981,both of which subsequent- ly gave birth to calves in the area.No overlap with radi o-co 11 ared animals from the mai n herd or other sub- herds was noted,although one female did move across the Talkeetna River. Small groups of caribou,including cows and calves,have been seen in most of the side drainages of the upper Talkeetna River.This'appears to be another resident subherd,probably of fewer than 400 animals,and having some spatial overlap with the main Nelchina herd.Three caribou in this upper Talkeetna River subherd (two adult females and one adult male)were collared on 18 April 1980.These animals were relocated 50 times and were always found in drainages of the upper Talkeetna River or in the upper reaches of the nearby Chickaloon River (Figure WID).One female raised a calf in 1980,and both raised calves in 1981.The male spent the summer of 1980 in the mountains west of the Talkeetna River. E-3-218 - ~, - ..... ,..... -Habitat Use At one time or another during their annual movements s Nelchina caribou probably use most of the vegetation types in the Susitna area.However s Pitcher (1982)found caribou mostly in spruce forests shrubland s herbaceous vegetation types and bare substrate types s with virtually no use of mixed or deciduous forests. Nelchina caribou show considerable variation in habitat types used seasonallys and types used most by bulls are different from types used most by cows (Table W37). Bull s tend to use spruce forests more than cows at all seasons except autumn whereas cow use of tundra- herbaceous types is greater at all seasons than bull use. These differences are likely a reflection of the tendency of bulls to remain much longer in the forested wintering areas and to summer at lower elevations than cows (see Figure Wll).Use of shrubl and is simi 1ar for cows and bulls overall but differs seasonally.Bulls tend to use this habitat most in summer and autumn whereas cows use it most during spring,calving and summer (Pitcher 1982). As mentioned s differences between bulls and cows in habi- tat use were partly related to differences in elevation. The sexes occurred at about the same elevations during autumns the rut,and winter but females were consistently found at higher elevations during spring migration,calv- ing and summer (Figure WI1). The food habits of caribou vary seasonally with avai 1able plant forage (Skoog 1968).In spring and summer grasses, sedges and the buds of willow and birch are important and a wide variety of forbs are eaten as they become avail- ab 1e.Except duri ng years of 1ate snowme lt when new growth is slow to appear,lichens are unimportant in the spring diet.In late summer mushrooms are an actively sought s but minor diet item.During autumn browse becomes less important but sedges and grasses remain major di et items and 1ichens assume greater importance. Through the winter the diet of Nelchina caribou consists of about equal portions of graminoids and lichens (Skoog 1968)• -Population Characteristics The Nelchina herd was estimated to consist of about 40,000 animals when first surveyed in 1955.Subsequently the herd grew to 71,000 in 1962 s decreased to about 7700 in 1973 and currently numbers about 21,000 (Table W38). The management pl an for the Nelchina herd (ADF&G 1976) call s for maintenance of the herd at about 20,000 adult anima 1s through harvest of the annual increment. E-3-219 The sex and age composition of the Ne1china herd remained almost the same from fall 1980 to fall 1981.Cows and bull s older than one year comprised 49.1%and 29.9%, respectively,of the herd in October 1981.Calves comprised 21.1%or 42.9 calves per hundred females one year and older (Pitcher 1982).The proportion of bulls was hi gh compared to the proport i on observed in earl i er years,a finding that would be expected in a growing population that had previously had a low proportion of males (Bergerud 1980). Skoog (1968)estimated the overall pregnancy rate of Ne1china caribou to be 72%for females one year and older from 1957 to 1962.Full reproductive potential was not realized even in the fully adult age classes.Only 13% of year1 i n9 fema1 es were pregnant compared to 61%of two-year-01 ds and 89%of fema1 es three years and 01 der. In 1980 and 1981,the proportion of calves in the post-ca 1 vi ng aggregat ions averaged about 56 cal ves per 100 females one year and older.These data suggest that cons i derab1 e cal f mortality occurs shortly after birth. Pitcher (1982 pers.comm.)estimated that calf survival to 11 months was 43%for 1980 cal ves and 60%for 1981 calves.Survival rates for older caribou (>1 year)were 93.5%for females and 87%for males. Survi val rates of cari bou are i nf1 uenced by many factors including disease,parasitism,weather,accidents,food availability,predation and hunting.Parasitism and disease may kill a few caribou each year in the Ne1china herd but these are not major mortality factos.Wet,cold weather during calving can result in high levels of calf, mortality which Skoog (1968)believed could ultimately control caribou population levels.This is a factor. however,that is more likely to affect coastal herds and more northerly herds than the Nelchina herd (Skoog 1968)• Accidents are not a major cause of mortal ity but deserve s peci a1 ment i on because they are a factor that coul d be directly increased by the Susitna development.Caribou have been observed to fall through weak ice and drown,to drown when unable to climb out of water flanked by perpendicular walls of overflow ice (especially calves), and to die after falling and breaking bones when travers- ing glare ice (Skoog 1968).The potential for the Susitna development to increase this type of mortality is discussed in Section 4.3(a),(ii). E-3-220 - - - - .... - - - - - ,."., The major factors that are believed tl1il control caribou mortality and ultimately population levels,both in Alaska and el sewhere,are food avai lai 1ity and predat i on (including hunting).In mainland North America the popu- 1 at ion density of most cari boy herds appears to be much less than the maximum that the rangecoul d support and,. indeed,in many herds is much less than the range has hi storica lly supported (e.g.,LeResche 1975,Parker 1972, Bergerud 1980,Table W38).Food availability in winter, because of snow cover,is likely to be more critical than avai 1abi 1 tty in summer and many early workers speculated that declines in caribou numbers in North America in the early 1900·s were caused by winter forage (mainly 1 ichen) destruction by forest fires (Scatter 1967).However, evaluations of more rigorous analyses (e.g.,Henshaw 1968;Kelsall and Klein 1979;Klein 1967;Roby 1980; Bergerud 1974)show that starvation or even observable debilitation in caribou during winter are rare except in populations insulated from predators and prevented from dispersing to unoccupied habitats (cf.Klein 1968; Scheffer 1951;Leader-Willi ams 1980). Skoog (1968)believed that neither overgrazing nor fire had greatly affected the Nelchina range in the early 19601 s.The herd was considerably larlJer than now and food availability is unlikely to be a major factor affecting survival of the present herd. Several authorS have presented evidence that caribou numbers are.effectively controlled by predation.For example,Kelsall (1968),Parker (1972),Miller and Broughton (1974),and Davis et al.(1980)all report evidence that caribou numbers have declined as predator (mainly wolf)numbers increased,or that caribou numbers have increased as predator numbers decreased.Bergerud, in two reviews (1974,1980),demonstrates convincingly that where capable predators (wolves,bears,lynx)are common and hunting by man is insignificant,caribou popu- lations are effectively regulated by predation. Si nee the introduction of firearms to North America, hunting has probably been the major caUSe of population declines (Bergerud 1974,Calef 1980).Calef (1980) .reported that in some herdsi n the Northwest Territories hunter kill is in excess of annual recruitment.Doerr (1980)isolated excessive hunting as the primary cause of population declines in the Nelchina and Western Arctic herds in Al aska. [-3-221 Hunting and wolf predation probably account for about equal portions of the annual mortality of the present Nelchina herd.Table W39 shows the level of hunter harvest for 1972 to 1981.During that time,hunter harvest in years for which herd size data are available has varied form 1.4%to 9.6%of the herd.Hunter harvest was about 4%in 1981. Wolf predation has varied with the size of the wolf popu- lation.Skoog (1968)estimated that wolves took 1.1 - 2.6%of the herd from 1957 -1962.More recently Ballard et al.(1982)estimated wolf predation rates varying from 7 -10%of the herd in 1973 to 2 -3%in 1981. The average mortal ity rate for caribou one year and older of both sexes in 1981 was 9.8%.If Ballard et al's (1982)estimate of 2 -3%mortality applies to adults as well as calves (as they suggest),then wolf predation combined with hunter harvest (3.9%---Table W39)account for 60 -70%of the annual adult mortality in the Nelchina herd. (iii)Dall Sheep Dall sheep studies were conducted in the upper Susitna River basin during the summer of 1980,spring and summer of 1981,and spring of 1982.The study area includes all drainages flowing into the Susitna River from Gold Creek to Kosina Creek on the south to the Denal i Highway on the north.Survey efforts were confined to areas of known or suspected Dall sheep habitat within this area (Figure W12). (Ballard et al.1982b).These areas contain semi-open, precipituous terrain,with rocky slopes,ridges,and cliffs (Lawson and Johnson 1982). -Distribution There are three general areas in the upper Susitna basin that have steep rocky slopes at sufficient elevation to be potential Dall sheep habitat.The first of these areas is north of the Susitna River between the proposed Devil Canyon and Watana dam sites.Aerial surveys were conducted in this area in the Portage Creek and Tsusena Creek drainages (Figure W12).The second potential site for Dall sheep was in the mountains between the Susitna and Talkeetna Rivers,extending eastward from the Fog Lakes to Kosina Creek.The third area was north of the Susitna River,to the east of Watana Creek.This area was established as a popUlation trend count area for Dall sheep by ADF&G in 1967 (Figure W12). E-3-222 - .... - - - - Aerial surveys to determine the seasonal distribution and abundance of Dall sheep in the areas described above were conducted on July 22-23,1980,on March 13 and 25,1981, between May 13 and June 24,1981,on July 28,1981 and on March 23,1982.The date,location,number,sex,and age of sheep were recorded for all si ght ings. A total of 72 sheep (7 legal rams,12 1 ambs and 54 un- identified)were counted in the Portage Creek and Tsusena Creek drainages in JUly 1980.Four sheep were seen north of Portage Creek,two east of Tsusena Creek,and the other 66 were seen in the headwater regi ons of Tsusena Creek.The only previous ADF&G survey in this area was a 1977 count of 91 sheep (8 legal rams,18 1ambs,65 others).The 1977 survey included the Jack River drain- age (north of Tsusena Creek),which was not surveyed in 1980.All of the sightings were far from the proposed impoundments and access roads. During July 1980 only eight sheep (1 ram,7 unidentified) were observed in the Watana Mountain-Grebe Mountain area. Earlier observations in 1977 suggested that at least 34 sheep were present on Mt.Watana.Numerous observations of sheep in the Terrace Creek area (a southern tributary of Kosi na Creek)have been made,but none were observed during the 1980 survey. On March 25,1981 a winter distribution survey was con- ductedi n the same area surveyed in July 1980.Twenty- two sheep were sighted and two groups of 3-4 tracks were seen.If data collected during the summer 1980 survey and th is survey were representative of the sheep popu 1a- tion,they would indicate that sheep were migrating into the area during winter.All sheep observations were located on the southern extreme of the count area,we 11 away from the impoundment.Therefore,impacts of the impoundments on these sheep popul ations would appear to be minor. The Watana Hi 11 s area has been surveyed for Dall sheep by ADF&G yearly since 1967.The data from the 1980 and 1981 surveys show the same general patterns as previ ous sur- veys (Table W40).The 1981 count of 209 sheep was the second hi ghest number of sheep recorded for this area. The percentage of lambs was similar to past years,and suggests that productivity and survival are remaining constant.The small number of legal rams counted could reflect the rather high (13)sport.harvest taken from this area in 1980 (TObey,pers.comm.).Although the 1981 count was relatively high,it is suspected that the population has remained·stable or perhaps increased slightly. E-3-223 The winter distribution of sheep in the Watana Hills area was surveyed in March of 1981 and 1982.Eighty-seven sheep were sighted in 1981,and 77 in 1982,all on south- facing slopes.Geist (1971)suggested that south-facing slopes are an important part of Dall sheep winter range. They provide maximum exposure to winter sun,and fre- quently have shallower snow than slopes with different aspects.Fewer sheep were observed than in the summer surveys,probably because of poor observabi 1ity due to snow cover and/or movement of sheep from the area. Mineral licks are known to be important for Dall sheep and are a cOl11Tlon component of spri ng ranges.Heimer (1973)suggested that they be considered a critical habi- tat requirement.The sheep in the Watana Hi lls area have been observed frequenting a mineral lick along the lower elevations of Jay Creek,at an elevation of about 671m. The Jay Creek mineral lick was overflown from May 6 through June 24,1980;the number,sex and age of the sheep recorded are shown in Table W41.Sheep were sited on 28 of 33 occassions (85%).The largest single group observed was 15,representing approximately 7 percent of the observed Watana Hills summer population,and approxi- mately 17 percent of the observed winter population. Sheep were observed frequenting other locations adjacent to the Jay Creek mineral site.On May 23 and 25,1981, groups of 6 and 12 rams,respect i ve 1y,were observed· scrapi n9 and eat i ng so i 1 on the ri dge located on the east side of Jay Creek at an elevation of 692m,directly opposite the main lick area (Table ).Since only rams were observed on these 2 occass fans,the observat i on could represent 'a preferential use of certain areas by sex or age class.Also,on 3,12,13,15,17 and 19 of June,sheep of different age classes were observed at an area approximately 2 miles upstream from the main mineral area (Table ).This area also appears to be mineral- i zed.- In an aerial survey of summer distribution on 28 July, 1982,no sheep were observed at the Jay Creek area.How- ever,10 ewes and yearlings were observed actively util- izing a known mineral lick in the drainage of the east fork of Watana Creek,approximately 7 miles north of the Jay Creek site. The mineral lick was also visited by ADF&G biologists on May 9,1981.Sheep usage of the area ranged from the Jay Creek streambottom (610m)to the top of the bluff (747m) and for an undetermi ned di stance away from the bluff. Signs of heavy moose utilization were evident as well. £-3-224 - - ~I - (iv)Brown Bears Most of the site-specific information for brown bears in the Susitna basin was obtained from recent studies by Miller and McAllister (1982).Additional site-specific information was obtained from studies in the upper Susitna and Nelchina River basins during 1979 (Miller and Ballard 1980;Spr aker et a 1.1981). -Distribution Brown bears or gri zz ly bears (the former term will be used throughout this report)are widely distributed and abundanti n most parts of Alaska.Brown bears appear best adapted to natural,relatively open,undisturbed areas with good cover and an abundance of perennial suc- cul ent herbs and/or fruit-beari ng shrubs (Mealy et a 1. 1981).The omnivorous food habits of brown bears as well as their non-gregarious soci al structure and high degree of mobil ity allow them to ut i 1 i ze resources ina 1 arge number of habitats throughout an expansive area (Kni ght 1972).Because of their opportunistic nature,brown bears appear to be ab 1e to adapt to a vari ety of man- caused disturbances in thei r habitat.However,exper- i ence has amply demonstrated that brown bear abundance is usually incompatible with human presence;resulting human-bear interactions commonly have resulted in the extermi nati on of brown bears from sett led areas through intensive hunting,trapping and/or poisoning programs. Brown bear research in the upper Susitna and Nelchina river basins has been ongoing since 1978 (Ballard et al. 1980,Spraker et al.1981).l'¥1ost studies were initially concerned with the effects of brown bear predat ion on moose but more recent studies have concentrated on all aspects of brown bear ecology (J'V1i ller and McAllister 1982).No site-specific information is available on brown bear in the lower Susitna basin,where their densi- ties are relatively low.Within the upper Susitna basin, brown bears generally are most abundant in open tundra habitats during most of the late spring and early fall periods.Many brown bears appear to utilize lower eleva- t i on spruce hab itats duri ng the early spri ng.Current information suggests that brown bears in the upper Susitna basin are abundant and that populations are young and productive . .Seasonal Movements The brown bear1s omnivorous feeding habits,social structure,behavi oral interact ions and wi nter denn ing E-3-225 requirements necessitate extensive movements throughout 1arge areas (Crai ghead and Mi tche 11 1982).It appears that the utilization patterns of large geographic areas by brown bears is largely dependent on the spatial and temporal availability of food.Information from a num- ber of areas in Canada and the United States suggests that brown bears establish traditional movements to exp 1oit dependable sources of food.Often these food sources are only seasonally available for short periods of time.Extensive traditional movements are common in many popul ations of brown bear (Pearson 1976;Reynolds 1979;Craighead 1980). Based on relocations of radio-collared brown bears in the upper Susitna basi n during 1980 and 1981,Mi ller and McAllister (1982)documented regular seasonal move- ments of brown bears that appeared to be associ ated with regional and elevational differences in food availability.Movements of brown bears'from the upper Susitna basin to Prairie Creek during July and August were perhaps the most noteable regional movements observed during the study.These regul ar seasonal movements of brown bears appeared to be associated with high concentrations of spawning king salmon in Prairie Creek during this time of year. Although bad flying conditions prevented complete docu- mentat i on of the number of brown bears that move from the upper Susitna basin to Prairie Creek,local resi- dents report that high concentrat ions of brown bears occur in the area during the salmon run.Although a 1arge number of an ima 1s may ut i 1i ze th is food source, it is not clear if brown bears are dependent on the supply of salmon.For example,moderately dense brown bear populations exist in the Nelchina basin without access to salmon (Mi ller and Ball ard 1982).As suggest~d by Miller and McAllister (1982),Prairie Creek salmon may be an important buffer when other food sources such as berry crops are less available.All of the radio-collared brown bears that moved to the Prairie Creek area had portions of their home ranges north of the Susitna River and therefore had to cross the river en route to or from Prairie Creek. Movements of brown bear in the early spri ng also appeared to be related to elevation and the avail- ab i1ity of new plant growth.Wi th the exception of sows with cubs,it appeared that most brown bear moved to lower elevations on or near the Susitna River following emergence from over-wintering dens.This was E-3-226 .. - - - ~, - I~ - """", ..... attributed to the relatively earlier melt-off of snow, particularly on south-facing slopes,and the subsequent avail ability of over-wi ntered berries and new plant growth.Carcasses of winter-ki lled ungul ates and new- born calves in these areas also would provide food for brown bears.Radio locations of brown bears in the upper Susitna basin during the springs of 1980 and 1982 indicated that,excluding sows with newborn cubs (which remained at higher elevations),62%and 52%of the radio-collared animals,respectively,moved to areas on or adjacent to the Susitna River.Females with.new born cubs remained at hi gh elevations throughout the year.Brown bears were at the lowest mean elevations during June to August. Although some of the regional and elevationa1 movements of brown bears in the upper Susitna basin may be rela- ted to forage avai 1abil ity,it has been suggested recently that these movements are most closely associa- ted with brown bear predat i on of moose and cari bou calves (Miller and McAllister 1982).Use of lower ele- vation areas by brown bears may be directly related to the greater availability of young calves there but may also be related to overlapping use by ungulates and brown bears of more readi ly avail able forage at these lower elevations.Directional movements by 4 radio- collared brown bears to and from the calving grounds of the Nelchina caribou herd suggest that brown bears may move to calving areas primarily'because of the avail- ability of calves . •Denning Brown bear dens in the upper Susitna basin were on moderately-sloping southern exposures,and were gene- rally dug in gravelly soils either in tussock or shrub habitats.(Use of vegetation types for denning is dis- cussed below).None of the bears in this study re-used den sites.Brown bear den sites ranged in elevation from 710-1570 m with an average elevation of 1274 m. Radio-collared brown bears in the upper Susitna basin entered dens in ear ly October 1980 and in late September-earl y October 1981.During the spri ng of 1981,most bears emerged from their dens in late April- early May. -Habitat Use Brown bears in other areas of Alaska and northern Canada ut i 1i ze a wi de range of veget at ion communit i es.Although brown bears do occupy open habitats such as tundra or grasslands,they appear to prefer areas in relatively close proximity to timbered areas (Knight 1972). E-3-227 Habitat affinities of brown bear in the upper Susitna basin were based on the predominant vegetation types in the vicinity of each relocation of the radio-collared bears.Brown bear use of spruce vegetation types,which are concentrated around and in the proposed impoundments, was highest in May and June (Table W42).Bears tended to move to shrublands at higher elevations later in the summer.In wi nter (October-Apr i1 ),71%of the observa- tions were in the "other"category (i.e.,snow or rock). Comparisons of the use of vegetation types by brown bears during the spring and the remaining portion of the year indicated that brown bears used spruce forests signifi- cantly more often during the spring than during other times of the year (Miller and McAllister 1982).As dis- cussed earlier,sows with newborn cubs tended to remain at higher elevations;of 68 observations of sows with cubs,only 1 occurred in spruce habitats.Shrubl ands were most commonly used by sows with cubs (49 percent of the observations)followed by "other tl habitats (35%), tundra (10%),and riparian communities (4%). •Food Habits Studies of the feeding habits of brown bears indicate that the species is omnivorous,feeding on a wide range of plants and animals.Although plant material may commonly comprise a major portion of the diet,it appears that brown bears prefer high protein animal food (Craighead and Mitchell 1982). Based on dietary studies of brown bears in interior Yukon (Pearson 1976)and in Yellowstone National Park (Craighead and Sumner 1980),it appears that brown bears most commonly utilize graminoids and forbs during the spring and early summer.As berries and fruits become more available,these also are incorporated into the diet.Brown bears will eat carrion,if available, and may also kill ungulates or other large mammals. Small rodents such as ground squirrels are most often consumed during the late summer. As discussed earl ier,brown bear are attracted to both natural and artificial food sources,particularly if food is abundant and read;ly avai 1ab 1e.Some brown bear populations traditionally form aggregations to feed on salmon during the major fish runs (Stornorov and Stokes 1972). E-3-228 """", - ..." '""" '~'I - - ~, ~, - ,~ - - - - - Information on the diets of brown·beari n the upper Su sHna basi ni s 1imited.Overwi nteri ng berries and new green shoots of grasses and forbs are consumed during the early spring.Winter-killed ungulates as well as moose and caribou calves also are eaten.King salmon likely comprise much of the diet during the sal- mon run in July and August.Berries such as Vaccinium sp.are likely consumed throughout the late summer and fall period. One of the most noteable results of the brown bear studies in the upper Susitna basin is recognition of the importance of moose calves in the spring diet of brown bears.Ballard et al.(1981)found that of 123 radio-tagged moose calves,55 percent had died of natural causes by November (following their birth)and that 79 percent of all natural mortalities were caused by brown bear predation.Relocations of 23 radio- collared brown bears that were intensively monitored (twice/d)during the spring 1978,showed that 14 of the 23 bears regularly relocated were observed at least once on a moose calf kill (Ballard et al.1981,Spraker et aT.1981).During the latter study,a total of 37 calf moose,28 adult moose,4 unidentified moose,3 caribou and 6 other species of mammals were ki lled by brown bears yielding a total of 1 kil1/5.6 observation days (l moosel6.3 observation days).The lower kill rate of 1 killllO.2 days given by Miller and McAllister (1982)is probably an underestimate due to less moni- toring of radio-collared animals (compared to Ballard et al.1981)and is based on only 3 moose calves,2 adult moose,and 3 unidentified species. The average home range size of male brown bears in the upper Susitna basin 1s 790 km 2 (n=14);for females it is 316 km2 (n=19)(Mi 1 lerand McAllister 1982). .Home Range Compari sons of the home range 5 i zes of brown bears in the upper Susitna basin with brown bears in other areas indicate that bears in the Susitna basin have relative- ly large home ranges (Table W43).Only home ranges of bears from northwestern Alaska (a relatively unproduc- tive population)were larger.On the basis of this information,Miller and McAllister (1982)suggested that home range size and brown bear densities are inversely related and that both are a function of the distribution and abundance of food resources.The 1arge home ranges of brown bears in the Susitna basin, therefore,may reflect relatively low primary produc- t ivity of food items that are important to brown bears and/or a patchy distribution of important food items. E..3-229 As discussed previously for moose,home range analyses are useful in assessing the number of animals that may be affected by the proposed impoundments.Mi 11 er and McAllister (1982)examined the relationships between the home ranges of radio-collared brown bearduri n9 1980-1981 and three areas that included:(1)the pro- posed impoundment,(2)a 1.6 km zone around the pro- posed impoundments,and (3)a zone occupying areas 1.6 to 8 km from the proposed impoundments. The mean overlap of the home ranges of 19 brown bear with the impoundment was 5%(range of 0-25%),for the 1.6 km zone it was 15%(0-48%),and for the 8 km zone it was 52%(0-100%).These fi gures under-represent the actua 1 use by brown bears of the area in and adjacent to the impoundment area because the home r.ange figures used in calculating the percent overlap are the total annual home ranges.Seasonal use by brown bears,par- ticularly during the spring,is more intensive. Analyses of the proximity of relocations to the pro- posed impoundments similarly show that brown bears selectively use areas that are close to the Susitna River,particularly during the spring period.Compari- sons of the number of bear relocations in the impound- ment areas as well as in the two Ilimpact ll zones dis- cussed earlier,indicate that use in the actual impoundment area was greater than expected duri ng all periods (almost four times greater during the spring) and that use of the outermost zone (1.6 to 8 km)was less than expected (Miller and McAllister 1982). -Population Cnaracteristics .Population Size Brown bear population estimates are extremely difficult and expensive to obtain because of the wide-ranging behavior of most individuals and thei r use of some habitats where visibility is obscured.Crude estimates of population sizes may be obtained from radio-tracking studies of home range size. Miller and Ballard (1980)ca~culated a rough density estimate of 1 bear/41-62 km in the Susitna River headwaters duri ng 1979.Th is est imate suggests that brown bear densit i es are i ntermedi ate between densit i es in southern and coastal Alaska and the Brook s range (T 2ble W44).Based on an estimate of one bear/41 km ,the upper Susitna basin would have a population of approximately 206 brown bears.It was the opini on of Miller and McAllister (1982)that brown bear densi- ties in this area were likely to be higher than this est imate. E-3-230 ~I - - ..- - - ,..... .Population Structure Informat ion on the sex and age structure of the brown bear population in the upper Susitna basin was avail- able from GMU 13 harvest data during 1970 to 1980,the 1979 study of brown bears in the upper Susitna and Nelchina River basins (Miller and Ballard 1980),and from capture data from the recent brown bear study (Miller and McAll ister 1982)(TableW45). The sex ratio of brown bears in the upper Susitna basin generally appears to be close to equal ity.The sex ratio of radio-collared animals was not representative of the actual population ratio because large males tended to loose collars more easily than females,but the data suggest that marta 1i ty iss imi 1ar for both male and female adult bears. The age composit i on of brown bears captured in the upper Susitna basin during 1980-1981 was 19.6%cubs, 11.8%yearlings,12.7%two-year olds,15.7%three-and four-year olds,and 39.2%adults.The moderately high percentages of young animal sin the Susitna brown bear population suggest that the population is young and productive.The age composition observed in the Susitna population during 1980-1981 is very similar to the age structure of grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park during 1959...1967,when the bear popula- tion was rapidly increasing (Craighead and Mitchell 1982). .Product i vity The mean 1 itter size for brown bears in the upper Susitna Basin was 2.3 (range of 1 to 3),based on nine 1 itters of newborn cubs observed with radio-co 11 ared females since 1978 (Mi ller and McAll ister).The mean litter size for the basin is comparable to those in highly productive brown bear populations on Kodiak Isl and and on the Al aska Peninsul a,and is higher than litter sizes in the relatively unproductive Brooks Range brown bears (Table W46). Of 10 cubs in 5 known 1 itters produced in the upper Susitna basin during 1981,3 (in 3 litters)were lost during the summer of 1981.One of these losses may have been capture-related although Tait (1980)has suggested that abandonment of 1itters of single cubs may be an adaptive strategy for brown bears.Physical evi dence {l act at i on}suggests that another bear may have had a litter in 1981,but cubs were never observed;they may have been lost pri or to the E-3-231 recapture of this bear during summer 1981.Two cubs in a litter of 3 were lost in 1979 studies as were 2 year- lings or cubs in a litter of 3 in the same year.No other losses from yearling or 2 year-old litters were observed suggesting that offspring mortality is concen- trated on cub classes.Causes of cub losses have not been determined but predation by male brown bears is considered most probable. Comparisons of the reproductive rates of brown bears in the upper Susitna and Nelchina basins with reproductive rates of other brown bear populations indicate that the Susitna-Nelchina basins support some of the most pro- ductive brown bear populations in Alaska (Table W47)• .Di spersa 1 Miller and McAllister (1982)believed that dispersal of sub-adult brown bears,both to and from the study area, was probably common.Several instances of dispersal by radio-collared brown bears were recorded.One male, originally tagged as a 2-year old in 1978 on the Susitna River north of the Denali Highway,was recap- tured and radio-collared near Clarence Creek on the Sus itna Ri ver.Another 2-year old male was captured near Deadman Creek during the spring of 1981 and moved downstream (88.5 km)to the vicinity of Moose Creek. During the fall the same animal moved back to the area in the vicinity of the Villages of Sherman and Curry. The importance of dispersal in maintaining brown bear population levels in the Susitna River basin and in adjacent river drainages is not known. .Sport Harvest ADF&G harve st dat a for brown bear in GMU 13 are pre- sented in Table W48.From 1973-1980,harvests averaged 64/year (44-84).The mean age of brown bears taken during the period 1973-1980 has been 6.5 years (6.3 for males and 6.8 for females).This relatively young age suggests that many GMU 13 hunters are not selecting for 1arge trophy bears.Of 656 bears that have been har- vested and aged in GMU 13 duri ng the peri ad 1970-1980, 10%were yearlings,29%were 2 years-old or less,41% were 3 years old or less,and 52%were 4 years-old or less (unpublished ADF&G data,cited in Miller and McA 11 i ster 1982).In recent years,sport hunters have appl ied pressure to extend brown bear seasons and bag 1imits in GMU 13.Thi s pressure has 1argely resu lted from research showing that brown bears are a major pre- dator on moose calves (Ballard et ale 1980,1981).In addition,Miller and Ballard (1982)suggest that there may be a harvestable surplus of brown bears in GMU 13. E-3-232 - ~. ,..... ~, - -- -I .... - ..... - .- (v)B1 ack Bears All site-specific information on black bear populations in the Susitna basin was obtained from the recent study by Miller and McAll ister (1982)during 1980-1982.Most of the data for 1981-82 was for the upper Susitna basin (above the Devi 1 Canyon dam site),but the studies now underway are also focusing on bears downstream of Devil Canyon. -Distribution B1 ack bears are the most corrmon and widely distributed of the three bear species in North America.They occur in most areas of A1 aska as far north as the Brooks Range. Black bears are highly adaptable and are able to utilize a wi de variety of habitats.Like brown bears,they are omnivores and their ranges and diet respond to regional and temporal changes in food availability.Prime black bear habitat can be generally characterized by relatively i naccess ib le forested terrai n,thi ck understory vegeta- t ion and abundant sources of p1 ant foods such as succu- lent herbs and forbs~berri es,and fruits (Pelton 1982). Black bears appear to be moderat e 1y abundant in the upper Sus itna bas in.However,because of the 1imited di stri bu- tion of suitable habitats,black bears generally occur only in a narrow fringe of forested habitat along the Susitna River. -Seasonal Movements Based on relocations of 53 radio-tagged black bears during 1980-81,Miller and McAllister (1982)described the probable seasonal movements of black bears in the upper Susitna basin as follows.In years of normal or abundant berry crops,many bears move to somewhat higher country adjacent to the spruce habitats along the river in later summer,returning to their spring and early summer home ranges near the river to den.Most of these 1 ate summer movements are upstream (east)and ina north- erly direction.In years of subnormal berry crops,most individuals make more extensive movements,moving long distances upstream or downstream in search of acceptable foraging areas or areas where salmon are available. These movements occur primarily along the main Susitna River indicating that it is a main transportation corri- dor.Most individuals making these extensive movements return to thei r former home ranges,but some do not.In 1ate summer and fall,particul arly during poor berry years,these extensive movements of black bears may bring them in close contact with brown bears,possibly resu1t- i ng in increased mort a1ity of black bears through i nter- specific predation. E-3-233 Females with newborn cubs are exceptions to this general pattern of seasonal movements.Fema 1es with cubs make less extensive movements than other bears regardless of the berry crop. -Denning Distributions of den sites of black bears in the Susitna basi n indicate that dens occur most common ly in steep terrain along the main Susitna River and its tributaries. However,the band of acceptable denning habitat appears to become narrower and more confined in upstream areas where dens are restricted to the immediate vicinity of the Susitna River. Black bear dens in the Susitna basin were generally located on moderately-sloping hillsides;the mean slope of 15 dens located duri ng 1980-1981 was 36 °(range of 18°_53°).Half of the dens were located on south-facing slopes;the remainder were on east-to north-facing slopes. Black bears in the upper Susitna basin generally denned at elevations between 457 m and 762 m.Of 16 den sites found in the vicinity of the proposed Devil Canyon impoundment,only one den was below the maximum impound- ment level of 442 m;the average elevation of these 16 dens was 663.9 rn (range 454 -1322.8 m).Of the 13 den sites found in the vicinity of the proosed Watana impoundment,9 would apparently be flooded at an impound- ment elevation of 671 m;the average elevation of these 13 dens was 664 m (range 549 -838 m).Two black bears denned downstream of the Devil Canyon site during 1981. Of the 14 dens located during 1980-1981,8 were in natural cavities and 6 were excavated.All of the dens in natural cavities and one of the excavated dens had been re-used during the winter of 1980-1981 and four of the dens were used again during the winter of 1981-1982. In contrast,black bears on the Kenai Peninsula were found to rarely re-use dens during successive years (Schwartz and Franzmann 1981).Miller and McAllister (1982)suggest that the relatively high re-use of dens by black bears in the Susitna basin may indicate a scarcity of acceptable den sites and/or habituation. Radio-coll ared bl ack bears in the upper Susitna basin entered den sin mi d-September to mi d-October 1980 and exited dens in early April to mid-May 1981.During the fall 1981,black bears entered dens about two weeks earlier than in the fall 1980,probably as a result of the 1981 berry crop failure (Miller and McAllister 1982). E-3-234 -, - .- - - ,.... ,.... Habitat Use Habitat use by black bears in the upper Susitna basin appears to be simi lar to genera 1 use patterns reported elsewhere in North America,where black bears most com- monly inhabit forested areas with dense understory vege- tation (Jonkel and Cowan 1971,Fuller and Keith 1980). Of 908 aerial observations in the Susitna basin,black bears were most often located in shrub 1 and (42.7%of observations),and spruce (39.4%)habitats (Table W49). Use of spruce habitats remained high throughout the year but was much less prevalent during the SIJmmer months. During August,black bear were often present in shrubland habitats adjacent to the spruce forests.This use of shrub 1and areas was thought to be related to seasonal increases in the availability of ripening berries.Use of spruce habitats appeared to differ among male and female bears;of 126 locations of female bears during the summer period,43%occurred in spruce habitats,whereas of 125 locations of males,only 30%occurred in spruce habitats. An examination of habitat use by black bears within the proposed impoundment area for theWatana dam showed that deci duous forests and shrub 1 ands were used si gni ficant ly more often th an expected .Other habit at types were used approximately in proportion to their availability.In the deciduous forest cover type,closed birch and open bi rch forests accounted for all of the locat ions.Simi- 1ar habitat associations were observed in black bear pop- ulations in northern Alberta (Fuller and Keith 1980).A 1 arge proporti on of birch forest types in the upper Susitna basin wi 11 be flooded by the proposedWatana impoundment. -Food Habi ts Throughout thei r range in North America,black bears consume primari 1y grasses and forbs duri ng the spri ng, soft mast (fruits and berries)of trees and shrubs during the summer and a mixture of hard and soft mast during the fall.Only a small portion of bl ack bear diets typically consist of animal matter and then primarily in the form of insects or carrion.Spring is generally a period of food scarcity and bears may often subs i st on remai ni ng fat reserves (Rogers 1976).Prefered,high-quality foods of black bears are generally more abundant during the summer and animals develop most of their fat reserves during this period. Little site specific information is available on the feeding habits of black bears in the Susitna valley. E-3-235 As discussed earller,Derry crops are an lmportant com- ponent of the late summer diet,and movement at"black bears lnto shrub land haDltat is thought to be related to the avallabi lity of bernes in these areas.Although plant foods may constitute the stable diet during most of the year,b1ad bears may a r so prey on moose ca J ves during the spring (Mi ller and jV]cAllister 1982).Ounng intenslve radlo-monltoring of black Dears durlng 2~May - ~2 June 1981,one male bear was observed on 1 calf moose kill and 1 adult caribou klilo Later in July,the same bear was observed on a ki If of a radlo-collared adult moose.It is not known 1 f the bear had k1 1 led these animals or if it was scavenging a klll of .another preda- tor.The import anceof ungu 1 ate predation to black bear populations in the upper Susitna basin is being addressed in ongoing studies. -Home Range During 1980,the mean home range size of 20 ~lgck bears in the upper Susitna basin was 31 km 2 (16 km L for 10 females and 46 km 2 for 10 males).During 19812 how- ever,the average home range siZe,was 218 km (LOU km 2 for 11 fema I es and 234 km L for 12 rna I es)• Although the large increase in home range SiZe between years may be part ly re 1ated to the greater number of observations of bears during 1981,Miller and McAllister (1982)suggest that the 1arger home ranges may refl ect the relatively poor berry crop during 1981 and the subse- quent need for black bears to move greater distances to find suitable foraging areas.The observation of black bears north of the Denali Hi ghway (a rare occurrence) during 1981 supports the suggestion that black bears made atypically long movements during the summer 1981 eMi ller and McA 11 i ster 1982).Compari sons of home range s iies of black bears on the Kenai peninsula (16.7 km for females and 98 km 2 males)(Schwartz and Franzmann 1981) with those of black bears in the Susitna area suggest that home ranges of black bears in the upper basin are 1arge. The proximity of black bear home ranges to the proposed impoundments suggest that black bear distributions are closely associated with lower elevation habitats along the Susitna River.Miller and McAllister (1982)delinea- ted two zones around the proposed impoundment areas (one included all areas within 1.6 km of the impoundments and the other included -all areas 1.6-8.0 km from the impound- ments)to assess the potential effects of the impound- ments and associ ated development on black bear popul a- tions.The mean overlap of 27 black bear home ranges £-3-236 - - ~l - -. """j - - ..... - - with the impoundment areas was 14%(0-45%).Overlap in the two adjacent zones was 50%(0-100%)and 122%(56- 195%)for the 1.6 km and the 1.6-8.0 km zones,respec- tively. -Population Characteristics •Population Size Miller {pers.comm.)attempted a black bear census in August 1982 using radio-collared bears and the Lincoln Index method.The study area included all black bear habitat in the upper basin east of High Lake;areas west of Hi gh Lake were not included because thi ck vege- tat i on hi ndered si ghtabil i ty.Dur i ng the survey flights,38 black bears were sighted of which 9 were marked.The popul ati on was known to contai n at 1east 21 marked bears,and thus an estimate of 90 bears {95% CI =50-170)wasderi ved.Miller (pers.comm.)felt that this estimate was too low,and the technique will be repeated again in spring 1983 • •Productivi ty Bl ack bear popul at ions in the upper Susitna bas in appear to be productive and healthy {Miller and McAllister 1982).This suggests that although the Susi tna area is close to the nqrthern 1 imit of thi s species,the habitat is adequate,even if limited in extent. Eight 1 itters with a total of 16 cubs were observed with radio-collared females during 1980 and 1981.Five of these litters were not observed until June -August and may have experienced some ·losses by this time. Because of this bias,the observed litter size of 2.0 cubs/l itter may be a sl i ght underestimate.The observed litter size for 7 litters of yearling black bears was 1.9. Litter sizes in the Susitna basin appear to be similar to those reported for other parts of North America. The mean litter size for black bears on the Kenai Peni nsul a was 1.9 cubs/l itter (based on radio-collared animals)(Schwartz and Franzmann 1981).Erickson and Nellow (1964)reported an average litter size of 2.15 for black bears in Michigan and 2.0 for Alaska {the exact locale was not identified).Jonkel and Cowan (1971)documented litter sizes of 1.5-1.8 cubs/1itter for a relatively unproductive black bear population in Montana over a several year peri ad. £-3-237 Although cub production appears to be quite high .in the Susitna basin,cub loss also is high.Based on only four litters that were observed prior to June 1981,4 of 9 (44%)cubs were lost.No losses of 1itters were observed on the Kenai Peninsula (Schwartz and Franzmann 1981).The high rates of cub loss in the Susitna basin are believed to be related to the vulnerability of cubs to predation by brown bears and to the relatively high black bear densities (and intra-specific competition for suitable habitats). Although available data are inadequate to calculate rates of productivity for black bear in the Susitna basin,Mi ller and McAll ister (1982)suggest that,on the basis of available productivity indices,that the Susitna populations are not as productive as black bear on the Kenai Peninsula.This was based primarily on the older age of reproductive maturity in the Susitna basin and the high rate of cub loss . •Dispersal Dispersal of black bears from the upper Susitna basin may contribute to bear populations in adjacent areas. Dispersal of bears into the Susitna basin appears less 1 ikely,however,because of the apparently saturated nature of black bear habitat along the Susitna River (Mi ller and McAll ister 1982).Several instances of dispersal from the study area have been documented. One sub-adult male was captured at Cl,ark Creek and was later shot near Hurricane on the Parks Highway.A 4-year old male was captured north of Susitna River and was 1ater shot in an area 72 km to the south.Three adult black bears moved downstream from the upper Susitna valley to areas downstream of the Devi 1 Canyon dam site.Two of these bears denned in the downstream areas. .Sport Harvest Based on Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game records for the 1973-1980 peri od,black bear harvests for GMU 13 averaged 66/year (ranges 45-85)during a 365 day season with a bag limit of 3 bears (cubS and females with cubs excluded from legal bag limit)(Table W50).Males have constituted 74%of spring harvests and 65%of fall harvests.Most of the harvest (74%),occurs in the fall season when bears are taken incidental to moose or caribou hunts. E-3-238 - - .... _. - ~, - ..... .- - ~\ (vi ) Ine current harvest is well below the sustainable har- vest level.At present it appears that few hunters sufficiently prize black bear meat or pelts from GMU 13 to charter an aircraft to hunt off the road system; only 35%of the hunters taking black bear during 1973- 1980 recorded aircraft as their primary means of trans- portation (Table W50).However,it is probable that the increasingly restrictive seasons and conditions for moose and caribou hunting in GMU 13 wi 11 result in increased black bear hunting in this area,especially as more hunters become aware of the ex i stence of sub- stantial black bear populations in the unit. Recorded black bear harvests in the Susitna study area during 1973-1980 average 8/year (a range of 1-15).In general,black bear harvests have been increasing in recent years wi th the 1argest recorded annu a1 take occurring in 1980.The largest harvests have occurred in the downstream regi on of the Su si tna River between the Talkeetna and Indian Rivers,the only portion of the study area currently accessible by river boat or highway vehicle.Improved access for highway vehicles and boats resulting from access routes open to the pub- lic will doubtless increase sport harvests in the study area.In downstream portions of the Susitna River, increased hunting is not anticipated to have signifi- cant impacts on black bear populations.However,up- stream of Devil Creek,where acceptable black bear habitat is highly constricted along the main Susitna River corridor,increased hunting will likely reduce and could eliminate black bear populations. Wolves Wolves in GMU 13 have been the focus of many studies and a subject of controversy for over 30 years (Ballard 1981). The history of GMU 13 wolves between 1957-1968 is summar- ized by Rausch (1969).From 1948-1953,poisioning and aerial shooting by the federal government reduced wolf pop- ulations to low levels.By 1953,only 12 wolves were esti- mated to remain in the basin.The popul ation expanded and peaked at 400-450 by 1965 when federal predator control efforts were curtai led (Rausch 1969).Moose popul ations declined to low levels in the area,stimulating a series of predator-prey interaction investigations beginning in 1975 (Stephenson 1978,Ballard and Spralcer 1979,Ballard and Taylor 1980,Ballard et al,1980,Ballard et aT.1981a,b). Wo lf control efforts were renewed in 1976-1978,but by 1980,the wolf population had returned to pre-control levels (Ballard 1980).Recent data on wolf distribution, habitat use,population characteristics,and detailed his- torics of individual wolves and their packs,are provided by Ballard et al.(1982c). E-3-239 Distribution At 1east 19 wo 1f packs were known or suspected to be utilizing the Susitna basin in 1980 -1981 (Figure WI3). At least six and possibly seven of these packs would be directly affected by the Susitna impoundment and addi- tional packs would likely be affected by borrow pits, access roads,campsites,and other facilities. Individual wolf packs have established territories which, as indicated in Figure W13,overlap little with adjacent packs (Ballard et al.1982c).However,due to the large harvest of wolves in this area,packs are periodically eliminated and areas with no wolves exist for varying peri ods of time unt i 1 new packs are formed by animals dispersing from adjacent areas.Ballard et al.(1982c) provided detailed historics of pack formation,membership changes,and di s integrat i on for 6 packs,begi nni ng as early as 1977.This data indicates that pack territories appear to be more stable than membership (i .e.,that a pack is defi ned by the area it defends rather than its size or individual members).This may be the direct result of the destabil i zi ng i nfl uence of heavy and extended hunting and trapping and the removal of key individuals from pack structure. During the summer,activities of packs containing breed- ing adults are centered on den and rendezvous sites,the 1atter bei ng above-ground sites where the pups play and are fed from the time they are about 2 months old.Figure W14 shows the locations of known dens and rendezvous sites in the Susitna development area.Dens are general- ly but not always roughly centered within the packs's territory and are frequently used for more than one year. Average distance between 35 dens in the Susitna and adja- cent areas was computed to be 45.3 km (Ballard et al. 1982c),a distance which compares well with 40.2 km observed in the Brooks Range of A1ask a (Stephenson and Johnson 1973).None of the known den or rendezvous sites in the Susitna basin wi 11 be inundated by the impund- ments,but both den and rendezvous sites that have not been located probably exist in the western portions of the Susitna basin. -Habitat use Habitats used by wolves vary widely (Paradiso and Nowak 1982)and in any particular area are probably determined largely by the habitat of their major prey.In the Susitna basin,detailed data on habitat use is available only for the Watana pack during the April to November peri od.Th is pack used a wi de vari ety of habitats but was most frequently encountered in shrub and spruce habi- t at types (Ba 11 ard et a 1.1982c). E-3-240 ~I - 1lIilJlo' - ~I ""'" - - Wolf dens in the Susitna area are mostly old red fox dens taken over and.dug out by wo 1ves.The major ity are located on slightly elevated sandy areas providing good drai nage.Entrance ho 1es face predomi nant 1y south or east.Both dens and rendezvous sites have been found in a variety of habitats.Overstory trees or shrubs at den sites include spruce,aspen,balsam poplar,paper birch and wi llow in densities ranging from 90%cover to very sparse (Ba11ardet a1.1982c). -Food Habitats Food habits of wolves in the Susitna area were studied by both direct observation of kills and analysis of scats co 11 ected at den and rendezvous sites (Ball ard et a 1. 1982c).The former method covers all seasons whereas the latter shows only summer food habits. During 1980 and 1981,six radio-collared wolf packs were observed on 83 kills.Moose comprised 57%of the kills, whereas caribou comprised 33%.Other prey,such as snow- shoe hare,beaver,muskrat,and other small mammals made up the remaining percentage of kills.Calves accounted for 51%of the mooSe kills,and comprised 7%of kills of caribou. Table W51 summarizes wolf summer food habits as deter- mined from analyses of sc ats co 11 ected at den and ren- dezvoussites during 1980 and 1981.Moose of all ages were the most important summer food items during both years of study.However,Ballard et a1.(1982c)suspect- ed that the importance of calf moose was probably over- emphasized by these data. Predat ion rates in the Sus itna area have been est imated to average one kill per pack every 5 days (Ballard et al. 1982c).Rates vary somewhat with pack size (Ballard et al.1981b)but do not appear to vary seasonally (Ballard et al.1982c)as has been suggested for some areas (Peterson 1980). Studies of wolf food habits in the eastern Susitna basin and adjacent areas since 1975 have suggested that moose are the single most important food item (Ballard et a1. 1981b).Adult moose are taken selectively from August through December while short and long yearling moose com- prised a disproportionate number of January to July kills.Wolves take relatively healthy moose in winter. Ballard et al.(1981b)found that during severe winters adult moose were taken in proportion to their representa- tion in the population but in average and mild winters disproportionate numbers of older adults were taken. E-3-241 The annual percentage of observed wolf kills of caribou has varied from 4%to 30%from 1975 to 1981.Excluding 1978,when the main body of the Nelchina caribou herd wintered in the Wrangel I Mountains and thus were largely unavailable during winter,the importance of caribou in the diet of Susitna basin wolves appears to have increased.(Wolf diet averaged 18%caribou for 1975 through 1977 in comparison to 26%caribou for 1979 through 1981).Some of the annual difference in percen- tage of occurrence of caribou could be attributed to the difference in the locations of wolf packs studied during these time periods in relation to distribution of cari- bou.Caribou distribution,however,is probably related to their density (Skoog 1968).The Nelchina herd reached a record low of approximately 7,500 in 1972.Since that time the popu 1at i on has increased so that by 1981 the herd numbered over 20,000.It is suspected that the increase in the caribou population generally has made caribou more available to wolves throughout the eastern Susitna basin and adjacent areas.If true,this pattern would suggest that if the herd grows even larger,caribou would also become more important as wolf prey.Assuming wolf poulations in this area increase slightly or remain stable,a larger caribou population may have some posi- tive benefits for moose,in that a larger percentage of the kills may be comprised of caribou,relieving the moose population of some predation mortality. -Home Range Each of the six wolf packs in the Susitna basin studied by Ballard et al.(l982c)maintained a circumscribed home range during the period that the pack existed as a stable unit.Wolf packs in this area occasionally defend their territories against other wolves,although intrusions into a neighbori ng territory often occur when the home pack is not using that portion of the area.Observed pack home ranges varied in size from 943 km 2 to 2514 km Z and averaged 1412 km 2 . -Population Characteristics Wol yes in the Susi tna basi n are heavi ly hunted and were also subject to an intensive harvest effort by Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game from 1975 to 1978.Thi s harvest was an attempt to experimentally manipulate moose numbers by reducing predation.Whether the population was at a low level in 1980 -1981,when detailed studies rel ated to the Susitna project began,is unknown.The population in the Susitna basin in 1980-1981 was stable r angi ng from about 40 in spri ng after the hunt 1ng/ trapping season to about 75 in fall when the pups join the hunting adults (Table W52). E-3-242 - ...,. ~,\ - ~, /IiIII!!!fi. - - - (vi i) Although there has been much speculation,there is little agreement on the factors that control wolf populations. Van Ballenberghe et a1.(1975)believed that pack den- sity,prey abundance and degree of exploitation varied so much among populations that the combination of factors controlling one population might be quite different from those controlling another.In the Susitna basin,how- ever,human exploitation is quite clearly the most impor- tant factor.In 1981 and 1982,almost half the fall pop- u1at i on was removed through 1ega 1 and ill ega 1 wi nter hunting.Including wolves taken during the wolf control program from 1975 to 1978,the average yearly harvest from the Susitna basin and areas immediately adjacent (Game Management Uni ts 13A,138 and 13E)averaged 38 and ranged from 26 to 68.Additional wolves were probably taken illegally in each year (Ballard et a1.1982c). A1though there are few spec i fi c dat a,the mai nten ance of these high levels of harvest suggest high productivity in the population.Ballard et 0.1.(1982c)do not report average litter size for the packs they studied,but their remarks suggest that 6 - 8 pups were produced year 1y by each pack.High productivity,both in terms of propor- tion of adult females that whelp and litter size,have been demonstrated in other exploited populations in both Alaska and elsewhere (Rausch 1967,Van Ballenberghe et a1.1975). The 1arge numbers of pups produced each year results ina large population of young wolves likely to disperse to other areas.Ballard et 0.1.(1982c)give numerous examples of radio-collared wolves that moved from one pack to another within the basin,wolves that estab1 ished new packs in vacant areas,and wo 1ves that left the bas in entirely.Dispersal of individuals is often preceded by forays away from the pack home range and may be precipi- tated by death of most of the other pack members through sport hunting. Wolverines The wolverine remains one of the most poorly known of the ]arger carnivores,and few scientists have attempted to study wolverines in their natural habitat.Van 2yll de Jong (1975)states that the reason for this is due to the species being uncommon,highly mobile,and restricted to the more remote and inaccessible parts of the country. Most wolverine studies in North America have reported on the species'breeding biology and other information obtain- ed from carcasses (revi ewed by Rausch and Pearson 1972). Recent advances in radio-telemetry have resulted in studies of wolverine movements,habitat use,and home ranges in northwestern Montana (Hornocker and Hash 1981),northwest- ern A1 aska (Magoun 1982),and in the upper Sus itna bas in (Gardner and So.11 ard 1982). E-3-243 -Di stribut ion and Habitat Use Wolverines occur throughout the Susitna basin and appear to show little preference for specific habitat types (Figure W15).The lack of use of specific habitats is most likely related to the scavenging lifestyle of this species which dictates seasonally long movements,a rel a- tively large home range,and a solitary existence (Hornocker and Hash 1981).Van Zyll de Jong (1975) stated that lithe wolverine's niche expla-ins the relative rareness of the species in the community compared to the efficient hunters among carnivores that act as providers [of carrion],and it implies a direct relationship between the biomass and turnover of large herbivore popu- 1 ations and the abundance and distribution of wolver- ines.1I The wolverine's propensity for wandering far and wide,which increases its chances of finding widely scat- tered and immobile food,as well as its well-developed food-catching behavior are probably also adaptations to the scavenger role (Hornocker and Hash 1981). Food avai 1 abi 1ity appears to be the primary factor deter- mining movements and home range sizes of wolverines (Hornocker and Hash 1981,Gardner and Ballard 1982). Breeding activity also influences thesesonal movements of males,and to a lesser extent,of females (Hornocker and Hash 1982,Magoun 1982).Temperature may also influ- ence movements;Hornocker and Hash (1981)reported that during the summer wolverines of both sexes moved to higher cooler elevations and traveled less during day- light hours.In the Susitna basin,Gardner and Ballard (1982)reported that changes in wolverine distribution occurred throughout the year,and th at food avai 1abi Iity probably infl uences these shifts.They noted a pronounced movement in spri ng,summer,and fall to hi gher elevations where arctic ground squirrels,marmots,and ground-nesting birds were abundant.Food is most avail- able in the spring and summer,and wolverines consume a wide variety of food at that time (see Wilson 1982). Krott (1959)found carrion,small mammals,insects and insect larvae,eggs,and berries in the summer diet. Magoun (1982)found microtines,ground squirrels,marmots and caribou in the spring and summer diets of wolverine in northwestern Al aska. Movements to lower elevations during winter are apparent- ly associated with the increased importance of carrion in the diet during the winter months.During winters of moderate to deep snow depths,the lower elevations along the Susitna River support high densities of moose (Ballard et al.1982a).Also,fewer birds and small mammals are available at higher elevations during E-3-244 - .- ,.,.., - -. - - ,~ ~' ...... the wi nter months (Kessel et a 1.1982).Wi nter ground tracking indicated that wolverine were preying upon microtines,red squirrels,ground squirrels,and spruce grouse in addition to carrion (Gardner and Ballard 1982). Both red squi rre 1s and spruce grouse are restr.i cted to forested areas,and other small mammals are also most abundant in coniferous and deciduous forests. The degree of territoria1ism exhibited by wolverines in an area appears to be related to the turnover rate of the wolverine population.Magoun (1982)found that female wolverines in an essentially unharvested population occupied exclusive home ranges that were overlapped by those of males.She did not have enough data to deter- mine if adult male home ranges overlapped.Hornocker and Hash (1981)stated that wolverine home ranges in north- western Montana overlapped between individuals of the same and opposite sex and claimed that territorial defense was essentially nonexistent.However,they were unable to establish the residency status of individuals in their population.Magoun (1982)reported that females with over1 apping home ranges might be mother/daughter combinations,and that young males which have not yet dispersed might be overlapped by resident adult males. The data obtained on wolverines in the Susitna basin indicates that except for some overlap between adults and juveniles,individuals of the same sex occupy mutually- exclusive home ranges.The overlap of ranges shown in Figure W15 is due mostly to mortality of some of these animals during the studies.Hornocker and Hash (1981) suggested that trappi ng mortal ity in thei r study area, while not ,excessive enough to reduce population size,may have contributed to behavioral instability within the popu1 ation causing a breakdown in the territora1 system. They pointed out that unexp10ited mountain lion popula- tions showed a highly refined system of territoriality, whereas exploited pou1ations were not territorial at all. Exclusive use of home ranges by same-sex adult wolverines in the Susitna basin and northwestern Alaska may there- fore be a reflection of relatively low trapping mortal- ity. -Population Characteristics The home range data obtained from the Susitna basin study and from other studi es can be used to est imate the number of wolverine present in the upper basin.Home range sizes of male wolverine will be used in these calcula- tions since more data is available for males than for females.The average home range siz~for 5 adult males lo~ated at 1ea!t 5 times was 413 km ,ranging from 141 km to 628 km.These ranges were sma 11 er than th~se reported for males by Ma~oun (1982)(mean =700 km ), but similar to the 422 km value found by Hornocker and Has h (1981). If we assume that wolverine in the 16~319 km 2 upper basin use all habitat types (including rivers~lakes~ rock and ice)~and further assume that adult male home ranges are mutually exclusive and contiguous,we arrive at an estimate of 40 adult males in the upper basin. Reported sex ratios of wolverine kits taken from dens and of fetuses do not differ from a 1:1 ratio (Pulliainen 1968,Rausch and Pearson 1972)~and therefore an est i- mated 40 adult females also occur in the upper basin. According to Rausch and Pearson (1972)~the effective reproduction of wolverine is 2 kits/litter.Hornocker and Hash (1981)believed that no more than half of the females on their study area were reproductively active in each of the five years of their study,and only 53%of mature females trapped in the Susitna basin were repro- ductively active (Gardner and Ballard 1982).About 40 kits are therefore added to the basin's population each year,resulting in a total estimate of 120 wolverines in the basin.The density of this population is therefore 1/136 km 2 (1/53 mi 2 ).This compares to other density estimates of 1/233 km 2 in northwest~rn Alaska (calcu- lated from Magoun 1982)~1/65 km in northwestern Montana (Hornocker and Hash 1981)~1/207 km 2 in British Columbia (Quick 1953),and 1/200 km 2 to 1/500 km 2 in Scandi navi a (Krott 1959).There are probab ly fewer than 120 wolverines in the upper basin~since it is unlikely that wolverine use all areas,and emigration,immigra- tion,and trapping and natural mortality probably result in sma 11 er popu 1at ion size.Some juvenil es also occupy home ranges that do not overlap completely with those of adults. Trapping is probably the main cause of mortality among wolverines in the Susitna basin.A total of 27 wolverine were harvested from this area during 1979 -1981;20 duri ng 1979 -1980 and 7 duri ng 1980 -1981.The low take duri ng 1980 -1981 was probab ly due to poor weather and snow conditions.Most trapping occurs in the acces- sible periphery of the area and mortality from trapping is likely to increase with the construction of access roads into the upper Susitna basin. (viii)Belukha Whales The belukha whale is a widespread arctic and subarctic circumpolar species that inhabits coastal waters.In Alaskan waters~two discrete stocks,a Cook Inlet-northern Gulf of Alaska stock and a general Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort stock,have been identified based on migration patterns~ summer concentration areas,and morphological differentia- tion (Sergeant and Brodie 1969,Murray and Fay 1979, Gurevich 1980).No evidence exists to indicate interchange between the Cook Inlet stock and the Bering Sea stock~and isolation has been suggested-based on morphological differ- entiation. E-3-246 - ~i - ,-. ..... - ...... - .-. It is speculated that the Cook Inlet population would experience some impact from the development of the Susitna project because of their annual concentration near the mouth of the Susitna River. -Population Characteristics Population estimates of the Cook Inlet stock from the mid-1960's indicate 300-1,000 belukhas in Cook Inlet, with an estimate of 500 animals (Klinkhart 1966)most accepted.More recent surveys support thi s estimate (Calkins 1979,Ca'lkins,unpub.data).Schneider (1982) reports 300 bulukhas from direct counts in upper Cook Inlet on June 11 and indicates that,due to turbidity,as many as 2 to 3 times that many may have been present. -Distribution and Habitat Use In winter,belukhas may be found in some of the ice free bays in southern Cook Inlet.Some individuals apparently range across the northern Gulf of Al aska;sightings of belukhas have been reported from ShelikofStrait,Kodiak Island and Yakutat Bay (Fiscus,et al.1976,Calkins and Pitcher 1978,Harrison and Hall 1978,Calkins 1979 and Calkins,unpub.data). Belukhas aggregate in groups from two to several hundred individuals in spring and summer seasons.These concen- trations have been attributed to exploitation of locally concentrated foods,such as anadromous fish (Tarasevich 1960,Seargent 1962,Klinkhart 1966).They are also apparently associated with polygamous breeding in April and May,with calving (reported to occur in May through August in brackish lagoons),and with the subsequent nursing of neonates (Fay and McClung 1976,Seaman and Burns 1981,Fraker 1977). Most of the Cook Inlet popul ation moves into upper Cook Inlet in spring and remains there through much of the summer.In spring and summer,concentrations develop near mouths of streams and ri vers in the northern in 1et. The 1argest concentrati ons occur annua 11y between the mouths of the Susitna and Beluga Rivers,sometimes ascending the rivers for several miles.Various species of smelt and salmon,both outmigrating smelt and return- ing adults,are the most likely attractants in Cook Inlet rivers.There has also been speculation that the mouth of the Susitna River is a calving and nursing area. E-3-247 Aerial surveys were flown by Schneider (1982)in upper Cook Inlet between May 17 and August 27,1982 to identify the timing and magnitude of belukha concentrations. Belukhas were concentrated in the inlet south of the Sus itna Ri ver mouth from the date of the fi rst survey through late June or early July,with peak numbers of 300 animals counted on June 11.As previously mentioned, these counts may be one-third to one-half of the actual numbers present.By July 8,the concentrations appeared to have broken up and only 7 whales were sighted in the Susitna to Beluga River area. Schneider (1982)indicates only that hooligan and king salmon were reported running in the rivers during the survey period.No estimate of the size of these runs is given. No calves were sighted duri ng these surveys,but Schneider (1982)attributes this to their low visibility in the turbid waters of the upper inlet and indicates that calves were likely present when surveys began on May 17. Chickaloon BaY,to the southeast of the Susitna River mouth,was also identified as an intensive use area,with 20-25 bel ukhas sighted there on each survey through Ju 1y 1.No data was presented on the number of cal ves seen in Chickaloon Bay. (b)Furbearers (i)Beavers Beavers are common and widely distributed throughout much of North America.They occur throughout the Susitna River drainage,from Cook Inlet upstream along the river,its tributaries,and ponds to elevations above 1000 m (Gipson et al.1982).They are herbi vorous and eat herbaceous and aquatic vegetation as well as the bark,twigs,and stems of trees and shrubs. The Susitna River,from Devil Canyon to the Delta Islands, was surveyed for beaver sign in summer 1980 by Gipson et a 1.(1982).Use of the ri ver by beavers increased pro- gressively downstream from Devil Canyon.An overflight of the river in the summer of 1981 and intensive surveys in 1982 confirmed this observation.No beaver lodges,food caches,or dens have been observed within the active flood- plain between the Tyone River and Devil Canyon,but they do occur on some tributaries and lakes in the upper basi n.In summer 1982,the river downstream of Devi 1 Canyon was E-3-248 - - - - - - - surveyed using a river boat,helicopter,and ground surveys to determine beaver habitat preferences,lodge construction materials,and forage plants.Preferred food sources were willow (particularly feltleaf willow),balsam poplar,and paper birch.Alder was the primary material for lodge con- struction but was rarely found eaten (peeled).Peeled birch,poplar and willow were also used for construction. The Susitna Ri ver between the Oeshka Ri ver and Portage Creek was divided into three sections on the basis of river morphology and vegetation characteristics:lower section from Oeshka River to Goose Creek,middle section from Goose Creek to Talkeetna River,and upper section from Talkeetna to Portage Creek.Each section was divided into linear miles of floodplairt parallel to the main channel,and each sample unit was one of the mile sections from the thalweg to the active floodplain boundary on one side.Beaver habitat was classified into four categories for analysis as described below.Although described in terms of water type,habitat also included bank·characteristics,water sources,tree and shrub vegetation. -Main Channel:consisted associ ated 1and masses. rocky and erodi ng banks volume flows. of the major river thalweg and Channe 1s are characteri zed by with high velocity,and high - ..- Side Channel:consisted of channels which spl it off main thalweg yet which carry large volumes of water.Repre- sentative channels showed rocky banks,silty flow with generally high velocity.Substantial amounts of erosion were often associated with side channels. -Sloughs:lower volume and slower flow characterize these channels.Silty banks with established vegetation are characteristic along with reduced erosion.The water source is predominantly Susitna with some clear water mixes.A number of sloughs may only exist at normal or high water levels. Clear water:this habitat consisted of creeks,river runoff,and seeps which were of non-Susitna or filtered clear water.Slow to moderate flow,silty banks,and established vegetation were characteristic. In all sections of the river,beaver were found to prefer slow-moving side channels or sloughs,as well as mouths of tributaries (see Table W53.)Such sites increase progres- sively downstream as the river channel becomes more braided.Beaver in the middle and lower sections are reported by residents to use bank lodges which have an £-3-249 underwater entrance and an air vent under a large tree.If this is the case,the Uhigh activity"values in Table W53 for these sections are low,since there is no detectable sign for these types of dens that would have been recorded. Slough and Sadlier (1977)identified the major habitat var- iables for beaver as water depth,stability,and flow rate, and distance to suitable food species.They found that the variables which correlated best with beaver population densities were low flow,low gradient (low erosion poten- tial),and banks containing a high percentage of food species.Results of the 1982 survey agree with their work as well as the findings of Boyce (1974)and Hakala (1952), who reported that beavers in Alaska favor lakes or slow moving streams bordered by subcl imax stages of shrub and mixed conifer-deciduous forests.The results also confirm a study by Retzer (1955)who found that beavers avoid large rivers with narrow valleys and high velocity flows. Aerial surveys of food caches in the fall have been shown to be an accurate method of determining the number of active beaver colonies in an area (Hay 1958,Machida 1982). An aerial cache survey conducted in 1982 revealed 14 beaver food caches in the active floodplain of the Susitna River between Portage Creek and Talkeetna (0.16 caches/km).Each cache is estimated to support five beaver (Boyce 1974),so the population of that stretch of the river is estimated at 70 beavers.This is a low population density compared to a range of 0.35-0.40 colonies/km found elsewhere in Alaska (Boyce 1974),but was expected due to the sc arc i ty of side channels and sloughs with slow-moving water along this reach of the river.Beaver densities would be much higher if beaver in nearby ponds and tri butari es were i ncl uded, but these areas are unlikely to be affected by the project and therefore were not sampled.Population estimates were not possible for the river south of Talkeetna,because high water levels had obscured or destroyed many of the existing caches. The 1982 survey also included Deadman Creek because of its proximity to the proposed access road.Densities of beavers were 0.53 active lodges/km along the middle portion of Deadman Creek and were even higher ina marshy sect i on of upper Deadman Creek (Table W54).An estimated 65 beaver currently occupy this creek. Beaver populations are productive and can withstand mod- erate trapping pressure.First breeding occurs at age 2 or 3,and annual litters average 3 to 4 young thereafter (Hill 1982).Young beavers disperse during the summer of thei r third year,sometimes travel 1 ing as far as 200 km to set up E-3-250 - ~I ~, - """ new lodges (Hi 11 1982).Trapping for beaver has histori- cally been common along the Susitna River below Devil Can- yon,along major tributaries,and around larger lakes like Stephan Lake (Gipson et ale 1982).Beavers in alpine areas have seldom been trapped because of the effort involved. These populations are vulnerable to environmental altera- t i on and/or overtrappi ng becaus,e of thei r dependence on small,isolated riparian habitats (Gipson et ale 1982). (i i)Muskrat Muskrats are common and wi de ly di stributed throughout most of North America.They occur throughout the Sus itna Ri ver drainage from Cook Inlet upstream along the river,its tri- butari es,and ponds to e 1evat ions above 1000 m.Muskrat s are primarily herbivorous,with a diet that includes pond- weed and swamp horsetai 1 (Perry 1982). The upper Susitna basin was surveyed for muskrat signs in the early spring of 1980 by Gipson et ale (1982).Lakes within 4.8 km of the Susitna River were surveyed by heli- copter,from the confluence with the Oshetna River to Gold Creek.Muskrat pushups were observed on 27 (26%)of the 102 lakes surveyed (Table W55).Most of the lakes and ponds with muskrat sign were above the river valley, between 265 m and 865 m in elevation.Populations of musk- rats were also noted along slow flowing sections of larger creeks,particularly where lakes drain into streams (Gipson et a1.1982). A downstream survey conducted by riverboat in the summer of 1980 indicated that muskrat numbers increase with distance from Devil Canyon.No sign of muskrat was noted on the ri ver between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna.Between Talkeetna and Montana Creek,sign of muskrat was limited to sloughs and marshy areas near the mouths of feeder streams. Muskrat sign was more commonly observed downstream of Montana Creek where numerous side channe 1sand sloughs occur (Gipson et ale 1982). Trapping for muskrats has historically been common along the Susitna below Devil Canyon,along major tributaries, including Indian River and Portage Creek,and around larger 1akes,such as Stephan Lake.Muskrats in alpi ne streams and 1akes have seldom been trapped because of the effort involved. (iii)River Otters -Information concerning the distribution and abundance of river otters in the upper Susitna basin was obtained during E-3-251 winter aeri al and ground surveys (see Tables W56 and W57, and FigureWI6).These data indicate that otters are com- mon along the Susitna,its tributaries to 1200 m elevation, and around large lakes (Gipson et al.1982).This distri- bution is probably related to the distribution of prey of otters,which i ncl ude primari ly fi sh and crustaceans (Ryder 1955,Knudson and Hale 1968,Towei 11 1974,Gi lbert and Nancekivell 1982). In November 1980,an unusual concentration of otter tracks was found on the river ice within the proposed impoundment areas (Gipson et al.1982).The significance of this track concentration is unclear,but it may represent upriver or downri ver movements of otters pri or to freeze-up.It is also possible that the otters were concentrating along the river to feed on grayling,which were migrating out of the tributaries to overwinter in the Susitna. Some otter trails were also observed in cross-country tra- vel,away from bodies of water.Such tracks have been noted in other areas of southcentral Alaska and may rep- resent dispersing sub-adults (Gipson et al.1982).Local trappers seldom take river otters because they are re1a- t ive1y difficult to trap,and the pelt values have usually not been high enough to justify the effort. (iv)Mink Mink are locally abundant in the upper basin along the river,its major tributaries to 1200 m elevation,and along lakeshores.Track counts from both air and ground in fall 1980 (Tables W56 and W57)suggest that mink are more abun- dant in the upper reaches (east of Kosina Creek)of the impoundment area than they are elsewhere (Gipson et al. 1982).Two mink were radio-col 1ared in 1980,but no valu- able data were obtained because one animal slipped its collar and the other radio failed.Food habits of mink vary among areas,depending on prey availability.Small mammals and fish usually form the majority of the diet,but crustaceans and birds may also be eaten (e.g.Errington 1954,Wi 1son 1954,Korschgen 1958).Muskrats may form a major portion of the diet where they are available (Hamilton 1940,Sealander 1943). (v)Marten -Distribution Pine marten are common nocturnal mustelids found in spruce forests throughout interior Alaska.They are locally abundant in the vicinity of the proposed Devil E-3-252 - - Canyon and Watana impoundments.Data from aeri altran- sects flown in November 1980 (Gipson et ale 1982)indiate that marten are present a long the Sus itna Ri ver at 1east as far downstream as Portage Creek and as far upstream as the Tyone River. -Home Range Gipson et ale (1982)found that home ranges of adult male marten were mutually exclusive and overlapped those of other sex/age classes.Average home ranges of 10 adult males were 7.02 km 2 .Female home ranges averaged 3.71 (n=3),excluding one animal with an unusually shaped home range.Between spring and autumn 1981,some marten home ranges appeared to shift location and vary in size periodically.Marten rarely swim across rivers or large creeks and these often formed partial home range boun- daries in the study area. Home range sizes in the Susitna area are midway between the figure of 12.8 km 2 for 4 marten in Mi nnesota (Mech and Rogers 1977)and 4.1 km 2 for 5 marten in the Yukon Territory (Archibald 1980).Differences in home range sizes in different areas and seasons is attributable to variability of food resources (Soutiere 1978,Lensink et al.1955). -Population Chara.:teristics An estimated density of 0.147 marten per km 2 was ca 1CIJ- lated from radiotelemetry data on 10 adult male marten in the drainages of Deadman and Watana Creeks along the Susitna River between the creeks (Buskirk,pers.comn.). This estimate assumes a 1:1 sex ratio with male and female territories overlapping,and 65%juveniles in the population (a figure derived from trapper harvest data in the Yukon Territory by Archibald 1980). Information from former and present trappers indicates that marten continue to be economi cally the most impor- t ant furbearer in the vi ci nity of the impoundment zones. -Habi t at Use Track counts from a November 1980 aerial survey indicate that marten are most numerous in coniferous and mixed forest and woodland habitats below 1000 m elevation (Gipson et al.1982).The highest track counts occurred between Devil Creek and Vee Canyon. E-3-253 Marten resting sites were located below ground in late autumn,winter,and early spring.In summer,when soi 1 temperatures are lower than air temperatures,marten rest above ground.Summer resting sites could not be charac- terized due to the escape response of marten above ground.Thirty-one of 37 winter resting sites (83%)were in red squirrel middens or nests.All were in forest or woodland vegetation types. -Food Habits The diet of marten shows some seasonal variation but microtine rodents are the primary prey at all times of the year in interior Alaska (lensink et al.1955). Microtines had an 88.8%frequency of occurrence in scats from the upper Susitna basin (Buskirk,pers.comm)(Table W58).Plant foods,such as bog blueberries,crowberries, mountain cranberries,and rose hips,are consumed most frequently in autumn,and attain an average frequency of occurrence of 23.3%.Bird remains were present in 9.6% of scats,most frequently in winter,and squirrels occurred in 6.8%,most frequently in spring. (vi)Red Foxes Red foxes and their sign have been observed throughout the upper Susitna basin including the proposed Devil Canyon and Watana impoundments.During 1980 and 1981,Gipson et al. (1982)employed radio-tracking,snow tracking,and aerial snow tracking to determine fox distribution,abundance,and habitat use.Food habits were studied from scat analysis, stomach content analysis,and examination of food remains at dens and on fox trai 1s.Aerial surveys were conducted to locate fox dens and dens were surveys periodically throughout summer to determine use. -Habitat Use .Denning Habitats Nineteen fox dens were located in the upper basin during baseline studies in 1981 (Figure W17)(Gipson et al.1982).Sixteen dens were located north of the Susitna River with several dens concentrated in the upper Watana Creek and upper Deadman Creek drai nages. Gipson etal.(1982)report that more dens are likely to exist on the south side of the river,but the aspect,phys i ography,and veget at i on appear more f avor- able for denning and hunting on the north side. E-3-254 - - - - - - - ,.... ..- - - - Dens are typically situated on an aspect facing south and/or west,and on well-drained prominences up to 5 m above surroundi ng areas.Dens are also characteri zed by proximity to a 1ake of over 4 ha or a creek.Dens were found between 1000 lTI and 1200 m elevation in areas of rolling hills adjacent to mountains.All active dens located were in or near areas of medium to high ground squirrel density. Foxes in this study area remained at den sites into October,much later than in other areas of Alaska (see Gipson et al.1982)or elsewhere (Storm 1972,Sheldon 1950).Faxes in the Susitna project area appear to use den sites throughout the winter,as evidenced by clear- i ng of snow from at least one entrance of most dens visited during winter months. Foxes in the upper Susitna basin appear to prefer rela- tively high elevation areas,near or above timberline. Slack spruce flats upstream from Vee Canyon areal so cornnonly used.Some foxes use low elevation tributary deltas during autumn,then shift to alpine zones as snow depth and volume of water fl owi ng over the ice increase.Other foxes remain above t imberl ine year round.Trai 1sin snow i ndi cated that foxes common ly foraged in winter in areas above timberline frequented by large flocks of ptarmigan. Almost twice as many tracks (151 vs.79)were located south of the river as on the north (Table W59).This is in contrast to the greater number of acti ve dens found on the north side.At the upper reaches of the proposed impoundment fox density was observed to increase markedly.The south side of the river above Vee Canyon changes from mountainous terrain to open, marshy flats which Gipson et al.(1982)say charac- terize good fox habitat. Gipson et al.(1982)report that searches along the Susitna River and lower elevations of tributaries in late winter and early spring 1980 produced no evidence of foxes in these areas.Tracks and other sign were noted on river banks in the following 1ate fall and early wi nter. -Food Habits Principal foods of faxes in the upper Susitna basin were determi ned by Gi pson et a1.(1982)through direct obser- vation,identification of remains at dens and on trails, scat analysis,and stomach analysis of foxes taken by trappers.In spring and summer,diets included Arctic E-3-255 ground squirrels~red-backed voles and singing voles. Ptarmigan were taken throughout the year and were major components of the di et in wi nter.Musk rats are taken where available and may be relatively important to faxes in the vi ci nity of 1arge 1 akes such as Stephan Lake, Cl arenceLake,and Deadman Lake.Di spers i ng young musk- rats and muskrats at pushups are especially vulnerable to predation by foxes. Carrion is also identified as important by Gipson et ale (1982).Foxes were observed feedi n9 on a carcass of moose and another of caribou near Watana Camp,and on a sheep carcass on the east fork of Watana Creek. Snowshoe hare are presently scarce in the Susitna study area and are therefore unimportant in the diet of foxes there.The scarcity of hares may be responsibl e in part for the relatively low number of foxes in the area as well as the seasonal shifts to higher elevations where ptarmigan are available. Transect data demonstrate a marked increased in number of fox tracks encountered progressi ng upstream from Devi 1 Canyon to the Tyone Ri ver.Dean Wi 1 son (pers.comm. cited by Gipson et ale 1982)indicated that most of the furs he buys are taken in open,marshy country and that pri me fox habitat decreases from the Maclaren Ri ver to the Tyone-Oshetna-Sus itna areas,as fl at open pl ai ns ri se to mountainous alpine terrain.Gipson et al.(1982)con- cl ude that the Susitna project study area supports a low density fox population relative to other areas in Alaska. E-3-256 - - -. - ,..., ""'" (vii)Lynx The distribution of lynx in the upper basin is very limited at present.Tracks and scats have been found in several areas including the.mouth of Goose Creek (probable lynx/ t racks seen from the ai r on November 19,1980,and a dense concentration of scats and tracks found on October 22, 1981),the mouth of Jay Creek (tracks seen on October 30, 1981),and along Goose Creek,1.6 km from the mouth (tracks seen on November 3,1981)(Gipson et ale 1982). In the past,lynx were apparently fairly numerous in the canyon country of the Susitna River,being found primarily in the forests along the river (H.McMahan,pers.corrm. cited by Gipson et ~l.1982).Trappers in the vicinity of the impoundments reported no sight i ngs of lynx or thei r tracks,and reports from trappers in the Gold Creek area suggest that lynx have been uncommon there in recent years as well (Gipsonet ale 1982). Lynx population levels fluctuate in response to avail- ability of snowshoe hares (Keith 1963)which were uncommon in the Susitna basin in 1981 (Kessel et ale 1982).Gipson et al.(1982)reported that historically,the frequency of natura 1 forest fi res increased from Portage Creek to the Tyone River,and speculated that snowshoe hares (and lynx) numbers may have been higher in the past.However,Kessel et ale (1982)note that no fires have occurred in the Susitna basin in the recent past,and they report that hare numbers appear to be chronically low in the Susitna area. If fire or other habitat change leading to an increase in snowshoe hares occurs,lynx populations will likely also increase.However,for the present,lynx are uncommon in the area. (viii)Coyote The distribution of the few coyotes occurring in the upper basin is generally limited to those areas downstream of Devi 1 Creek.No coyotes or thei r tracks were observed by Gipson et al.(1982)during baseline studies in the Susitna area,although several sightings of coyotes in fall 1980 were reported to them.Other sightings of coyote,or their tracks,have also been reported in the Gold Creek and Canyon areas (H.Larsen,pers.comm.,R.Roull ier,pers. corom.cited by Gi pson et ale 1982).Coyotes have not been seen or taken by trappers upstream of Devi 1 Creek.The distribution and abundance of coyotes in the Susitna area is probably limited by wolves rather than by habitat,food avai 1 abil ity,or trapping pressure.Wo 1ves are usually aggressive toward coyotes within their home range (Rolf Peterson and Jim Woolington,pers.comm). E-3-257 (ix)Short-Tailed Weasel Short-tailed weasels are locally abundant in the upper basin,and their tracks have been observed in a variety of habitat types at elevations ranging from the banks of the Sus itna Ri ver to over 1500 m.Transect surveys conducted in November 1980 yielded 746 short-tailed weasel tracks, 328 (44%)of which were counted on a single transect near the Tyone River (Table Furbearer-l).Most of the tracks (489 or 66%)were observed in woodland white or black spruce vegetation types;an additional 190 (25%)were counted in medium shrub types (Gipson et al.1982).It appears that short-tailed weasels can meet their food and cover needs in a variety of habitat types.Short-tailed weasels have been taken both deliberately and incidentally by trappers on upper Tsusena Creek,in the Fog Lakes area, and elsewhere in the study area,but they are not a species of major economic importance. (x)Least Weasel Least weasels occur at least sparsely throughout the upper basin and may be locally abundant.However,their small size and secretive behavior makes confirmation of their presence difficult.Several sets of tracks believed to be those of least weasels were seen in March 1980 along lower Watana Creek.The carcass of one least weasel,taken by a trapper at Fog Lakes,was obtained in February 1981,and a 1 i ve 1east weasel was observed near the southeast edge of proposed Borrow Site A on October 25,1981 (Gipson et al. 1982).The pelts of least weasels have practically no commercial value (Svendsen 1982),and thus information from trappi og returns is rarely avail ab 1e to supplement direct observations. (c)Birds Few data on bird populations in the upper Susitna basin were available prior to the initiation of baseline studies for the Susitna Hydroelectric Prject.Basel ine data on breeding birds were collected by the University of Alaska Museum (Kessel et al. 1982)in 1981 and 1982,and surveys for migratory waterbirds were conducted during spring 1981 and fall 1980 and 1981.Surveys for cl iff-nesting raptors and tree-nesting bald eagles were conducted in summer 1980 and spring 1981. Bird populations in the lower Susitna floodplain were also poorly known prior to the project.To obtain an overview of the distri- bution,abundance,and habitat use of birds ;n that area,three types of avifaunal surveys were conducted between Devil Canyon and Cook Inlet:(1)spring aerial surveys of waterbirds in 1981 and 1982;(2)a ground survey of all bird spec i es in ear 1y summer 1982;and (3)an aerial survey for bald eagle nests in summer 1982. E-3-258 - - - - - \~ ..... A total of 135 species of birds have been recorded in the upper basin.Their relative abundances (see Appendix EE)are largely a function of habitat availability.The most abundant species in the project area are common redpoll,savannah sparrow,white- crowned sparrow,Lap1 and 1ongspur,and tree sparrow.Redpoll s are habitat general ists,whereas the four other species are birds associated with shrub1ands,which cover 60%of the region (Section 3)• Of the 135 species known to occur in the upper basin,15 are ranked as regionally rare on the basis of current information:4 raptors (osprey,Ameri can kestrel,snowy owl,boreal owl),3 species of ducks (gadwall,blue-winged teal,ring-necked duck),4 shorebirds (up1 and sandpi per,turnstone sp.,surfbird,sander- ling),3 small land birds (black-backed three-toed woOdpecker, western wood pewee,yell ow warb1 er),and ruffed grouse.Most of these bird species are either at the peri phery of their geographi c ranges or are limited by a lack of appropriate habitat.All 15 species are represented by larger populations in other portions of A1 aska. At least 82 bird species have been recorded along the lower Susitnaf100dp1ain (see Appendix EF).The highest relative abun- dance and species di versity of birds occurred in the mid-and late-successional vegetation types • (i)Raptors and Raven Surveys specific for nesting raptors in the upper Susitna basin were made only during summer 1980 and spring 1981, and in October 1982.A total of 10 raptor species were recorded upstream of Devil Canyon.Five species (6 includ- ing common raven,a fu~ctiona1 raptor that often prOVides nests for some raptor speci es)are known to nest in the ii'-area,and two additional species probably breed there (Appendix EF).In total,53 raptorjraven nest sites have been reported from the upper bas in (Whi te 1974,Kes se 1 et a1.1982,Kessel,pers.comm.;see Table W61).At least two of these locations (GE-6 and GE-12)do not appear to exist and probably represent two of the remai ni ng51 loca- tions (see Table W61).Active nesting locations in 1980 r~i included 6 golden eagle,4 bald eagle,1 common raven and 1 nest of an unidenti fi ed speci es (probably gyrfa1 con). Active nest sites in 1981 included 6 golden eagle,5 bald eagle,1 gyrfalcon,2 northern goshawk,and 4 common raven. One additional active golden eagle nest was discovered during the course of other work in 1982.Nest i ng1 ocat ions that were not active in 1980 and 1981 presumably function either as alternative sites or,in some cases,may be used by additional pairs in years when population levels may be higher.Ta b1e W62 shows the gener a1 breed i ng phenology of golden eagles,gyrfalcons,and ravens in Alaska.These schedules are applicable to the upper basin. E-3-259 In 1974,White (1974)found 14 active nests within the same area of the upper Susitna basin:2 gyrfalcon,3 bald eagle,9 common raven,and an additional location that was probably occupied by gyrfalcons that year (GYR-1;see Table W61).White also reported an additional 13 inactive nests, ascribing 7 to ravens,3 to golden eagles,2 to bald eagles,and one to goshawks.The reason for the substan- tially different species composition between 1974 and 1980- 81 (more ravens and fewer eagles in 1974)may be related to differences in survey intensity and possibly to natural variations in the prey base. The density of active golden eagle nests present in the upper basin in 1980 and 1981 (one pair per 14.8 km of river)(Kessel et a1.1982)was similar to that found along the Brooks Range portion of the Dalton Highway in 1979 (one acti ve nest per 15.7 km)(Roseneau and Bente 1979).The 1atter dens ity appears to be one of the highest reported for Alaska.Murie (1944)found golden eagles nesting as c10se as 1.6 and 2.4 km to each other in Denali National Park in 1941 and 1939,respectively.Golden eagles regu- larly build and maintain a number of simultaneous nests, sometimes several·kilometers apart (D.G.Roseneau,pers. comm.),which are used as alternative sites in different years (Brown and Amadon 1968).White et a1.(1977)sug- gested that local populations of golden eagles may increase during years of high snowshoe hare populations;however, hares were relativelY scarce in the upper basin in 1980 and 1981 (Kesse1et al.1982).Murie (1944)noted that artic ground squirrels were a major prey of golden eagles in Dena 1i Nati onal Park in 1939-1941,and these rodents were abundant in the upper basin area during the study. Surveys for nesting bald eagles were conducted in the lower Susitna River floodplain in April 1980 by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,in late June 1981 by TES,and in early July 1982 by the University of A1 aska Museum.In total, these surveys located 38 nests (see Table W63).In 1982, the year for which data are the most complete,only 14 of the 24 nests found in 1980-81 could be located,but 14 new nest sites were discovered.Of these 28 total known nests, 17 were active and 11 were inactive.The amount and suit- abil ity of bald eagle nesting habitat and the number of nesting bald eagles increases markedly downstream of the Indian River (see Table W63.)Most of the bald eagle nests were concentrated in three sections of the river:(1) between Talkeetna and the Parks Highway Bridge;(2)between Kashwitna Lake and the mouth of the Yentna River;and (3) from Bell Island to the mouth of the Susitna River. The density of bald eagles nesting in the lower Susitna River floodplain is slightly higher than that calculated for the Tanana River (Roseneau,pers.comm.). ""'" - - - .... - - ...... (i i ) Gyrfalcons are less common than eagles in southcentra1 and central Alaska,but some regularly nest throughout the Al aska Range.Cade (1960)estimated the total A1 aska popu- lation at only about 200-300 pairs.Roseneau et a1.(1981) considered that an underestimate but doubted that the popu- lation exceeded 500 pairs.Gyrfalcon densities vary con- siderab1y between years (Cade 1960,Roseneau 1972,Swartz et a1.1975),but variation is probably less over large geographic regions (Roseneau 1972).The majority of the Alaskan population is found in northern and western Alaska (Roseneau et a1.1981),and gyrfalcons there tend to exhibit relatively low site fidelity from year to year (Cade 1960,Roseneau 1972).However,in the Alaska Range, where suitable nesting cliffs are more widely dispersed, most sites appear to be used every year (Bente 1981). There were no confirmed si ght i ngs of peregri ne falcons in the upper Susitna basi n during 1980,1981 or 1982 in spite of the number of manhours spent on ornithological field work and on raptor surveys (Kessel et al.1982,Kessel, pers.comm.).White (1974)saw two individual peregrines duri ng a 10-15 June 1974 survey;however,he found no si gn of nesting.One of the birds was a Il s ingle adult male ••• roosting on a cliff about 4 miles upriver from the Devil Canyon Dam axis,"and the other was "a sub-adult •••about 15 miles up river from the Devil CanyonDam axis."White (1974)stated that the Yenta-Chu1itna-Susttna-Mata~uska drainage basin "seemingly represents a hiatus in the breed- ing range of breeding peregrines •••,"and Roseneau et a1- (1981)stated that lithe Susitna and Copper rivers both pro- vide •••very few ••••potential nesting areas for peregrines." Suitable nesti ng habitat for goshawks and great-horned owl s consists primarily of occasional stands of mature paper birch and paper birch-white spruce stands,whi ch are most commonly found downstream of Devil Canyon (Roseneau,pers. comm.).Some nesting habitat for other tree-nesting species (i .e.,red-tailed hawks,American kestrels,sharp- shinned hawks,boreal owl,and hawk owls)and ground- nesting species (i.e.,merlins,northern harriers,and short-eared owls)also occurs in the Susitna basin,but no concentration areas of nesting habitat are known or expect- ed to occur. Waterfowl and Other Large Waterbirds The upper basin and the Lower Susitna River floodplain do not support 1arge concentrat ions of waterfowl or other waterbirds during either migration or the breeding season (Kessel et al.1982). E-3-261 The species composition of waterfowl in the upper basin showed some differences from that of central Alaska as a whole,in part reflecting the subalpine nature of much of the study area.01dsquaw and black scoter were the most productive of the waterfowl in 1981 (Table W64).Both species are primarily tundra nesters,and the Alaska Range is the only inland nesting location known for the black scoter in Alaska (Gabrielson and Lincoln 1959).On the other hand,the pintail,(one of the most numerous ducks in central Alaska)occurred in relatively small numbers in the study area,in spite of the fact that both 1980 and 1981 were high population years for pintails in Alaska due to severe drought in the Canadian prairie pro- vinces (King and Conant 1980,Conant and King 1981). Trumpeter swans bred commonly at the eastern end of the study area,from the vici nity of the Oshetna Ri ver to at 1east the MacLaren Ri ver.On a random fl i ght over ponds in this area on 4 August 1981,Kessel et a1.(1982) recorded 19 groups of trumpeter swans.Forty adu1 t birds,including 9 pairs with broods (28 cygnets)were seen.Thi s area is on the western edge of the habitat used by the Gu1kana Basin trumpeter swan population which has more than doubled dur i ng the past fi ve years (Ki ng and Conant 1981). The lower Susitna River itself appears to be little used by waterbirds.Few birds were seen duri ng spri ng aeri al surveys in either 1981 or 1982 (Table W64)or during the June 1982 ground surveys (see Appendix EE). Overall,swans,greater white-fronted goose,scaup sp., common merganser and merganser spp.were the most abun- dant species seen.Numbers were highest in the last 37 km of the river between the mouth of the Yentna River and Cook Inlet. Ice on the lower ri ver apparently broke a week or more later in 1982 than in 1981.During the May 7,1981 survey,the river above Talkeetna was breaking up and carrying a heavy load of ice chunks,whereas on May 10, 1982,this section of river was still almost entirely frozen.Since spring migration of dabbling ducks in central Al aska was only 2 to 3 days 1ater in 1982 than 1981 (Kessel,unpubl.data),the main spring movement had passed through the Susitna region in 1982 before water became available in the river above Talkeetna. E-3-262 - ,~ - - In addition to early season ice above Talkeetna~the main reasons for the low use of the lower river appear to be its rapid flow and heavy silt load.>These factors dis- courage the development of aquatic plants and associated invertebrates,the main diet of most waterbirds,and make food invisible,except at shallow edges or in sloughs. Corroborating this assumption is the fact that the most numerous ducks on the river were fish-eating mergansers. -Migration The upper Susitna basin,which is on a high plateau between the Al aska Range and the Talkeetna Mountains, does not appear to be a major migration route for water- birds (contra U.S.Corps of Engineers 1977).A rela- tively small number of individuals were seen during three surveys in Spring 1981 and six and five surveys in fall 1980 and 1981,respectively (Table W64). Scaup,including both lesser and greater scaup,were the most numerous species group during both spring and fall. Relatively large numbers of mallards and American wigeon a 1so moved through duri ng both seasons.Pi nt ai 1s were common during spring migration but uncommon in fall.Few geese or cranes were seen at either season (Kessel et ale 1982)• The upper Susitna basin was less important to migratory waterfowl in spring than fall.Ice breakup does not occur until mid-Mayan many lakes in the upper basin with the result that little open water is available to early- migrating waterbirds,such as the dabbling ducks and common goldeneye.Early migrants used the Susitna River itself and the thawed edges of 1akes.Use of the upper basin's water bodies increased toward the end of May, concurrent with the avai 1abi 1tty of more open water and the i nfl ux of the 1ater-arri vi ng loons,grebes,scaup, oldsquaw,scoters,and mergansers. The pattern of fall movement in the upper basin is simi- lar to that known for the rest of central Alaska.That is,peak numbers of American wigeon,pintail,and green- winged teal occur during the first half of September;of 1oons,grebes,and scaup during the second and third weeks of September;and of mallards,scoters,buffleheads and goldeneyes from the last third of September to mid- October.Swan migration,which includes both trumpeter and whi stl i ng swans,occurs between the 1ast week of September and the end of October. E-3-263 -Relative Importance of Water Bodies The wetlands of the upper basin supported relatively few waterbirds during the summer..An average density of on1 222.5 adult waterfowl and gu 11 s/km 2 and 2.9 broods/km were found on 28 intensively surveyed waterbodies in summer 1981 (Table W64).By comparison,a census of 13 waterbodies in the upper Tanana River valley,similar in size class distribution to those surveyed in the ~pper basin,had average densities of 183.8 adults/km in 1977 and 110.9 adults/km 2 in 1979 (Spindler et al. 1981).Broods averaged 6.2/km 2 in the upper Tanana River valley (Spindler et ale 1981).Productivity in the eastern portion of the Upper Tanana River valley study area in 1979 was 30-40 percent lower than historical levels typical of Minto Lakes and the Yukon flats (Kessel et ale 1980).Minto Lakes,Tetlin Lakes,and portions of the Yukon Flats are considered among the most productive wetlands in Alaska (J.G.King,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,pers.comm.cited in Kessel et ale 1982).Thus, the waterbodies of the upper basin appear to support a relatively impoverished population of waterfowl during the summer. The average dens ity of waterb i rds observed on 1akes and groups of 1akes in the upper bas in are shown in Tab 1e W65.Densities were generally quite low with the highest fall densities occurring at Murder Lake,Watana lake,and the Maclaren Ri ver-Tyone Ri vergroup (see Figure WI8). Murder Lake had by far the highest density of waterbirds in spring;the dens ity for 1akes near lower Deadman Creek was also fairly high. Kessel et ale (1982)calculated Importance Values (LV.) f or each 1ake surveyed based on the number and den s i ty of birds and number of species observed on each lake compared to all other surveyed lakes.Seasonal popula- tion statistics are listed in Tables W66 for the lakes having the highest scores.Of these more important water bodies,Stephan and Murder Lakes were among the top three in Importance Values for all seasons.Stephan lake received twice as much use in fall as in spring,but both water bodies consistently had relatively high levels of speci es ri chness.These 1akes assumed add it i onal impor- tance in early spring and late fall because of ice condi- tions.Murder Lake,which reportedly has some open water a 11 wi nter,provi ded some of the fi rst open water for early spring migrants,as did the inlet of Stephan Lake; green-winged teal,mall ard,and pintai 1 were using this open water on 3 May 1981.Likewise,these lakes provided the last open water in fall and were used by the late migrants.Swans used these lakes during October as E-3-264 - ~, other 1akes in the regi on became ice-covered.Between 9 and 11 trumpeter swans frequented Murder Lake between October 10-18,1981 (J.Irel and,pers.comm.cited in Kessel et al.1982);11 to 22 unidentified swans were on Stephan Lake from October 9-23,1981,and 120 swans were there on October 10,1980. WB 131,near the mouth of the Maclaren River,was another lake consistently supporting high levels of waterfowl abundance,density,and species richness.Its LV.in spring was lessened by the fact that it was still frozen during the first two spring surveys.Because it was far from the proposed construction sites,it was not censused for breeding birds,but a fl ight over the lake on 4 August 1981 revealed a flock of some 100 molting ducks, mostly scaup,as well as a pair of trumpeter swans.This and WB134 were the only duck-molting lakes found in the basin.A flock of 22 to 42 trumpeter swans congregated to feed on this lake throughout the first half of September 1980. WB 140,east of the Oshetna Ri ver,had the highest 1.V. of 28 water bodies censused during the breeding season. Not only did it have a high species richness (11 species),but it·also supported a large number of birds and an above average density.It was also of above aver- age importance during mi grat ion,even though it thawed later and froze earlier than most other lakes. Clarence Lake had the fourth highest LV.during spring and fall migration,but was less important during the summer.It had a relatively high species richness at all seasons,being used by both diving and dabbling ducks during migration,but primarily by divers in summer. Watana Lake was used in fall,especially in 1980,by migrant scaup,goldeneyes,and mergansers during the last half of September.Otherwise it was of little importance to birds. Pistol Lake in the lower Deadman Creek area had a rela- tively high LV.in spring because of the number and diversity of birds it contained after it began to thaw toward the end of the first week of May.However,this relatively large lake was only of average importance during summer,and was little used in fall. The southernmost Fog lake supported high levels of abun- dance and species richness at all seasons.It received l~ssuse in spring than at other seasons,probably because ice cover was still extensive as late as May 17, 1981.On this date,ducks were heavi ly concentrated in E-3-265 the open water at the in 1et end of the 1ake.Th is 1ake and WB 140 had the highest species richness (11 species) during summer. WS 032,a small lake at the west end of the Fog Lakes, supported a high density of birds in summer and showed high productivity (at least four broods of horned grebe and two of Ameri can wi geon seen on Ju ly 28,1981).It was not monitored during migration. Swimming Bear Lake,an alpine lake,received its primary use during summer.After it thawed in late May,it was occupied by at least five species of waterbirds (scaup, oldsquaw,seater,mew gull,and arctic tern),three of which were observed with broods on July 29,1981.Flocks of scaup and whi te-wi nged scoters were seen on the 1ake during the last half of September 1981. None of the water bodies in the upper basin had impor- tance values as high as those calculated for some of the better wetland sites of eastern interior Alaska from data obtained during fall 1980 by Ritchie and Hawkings (1981) (Figure W19)and during spring 1980 by Ritchie (1980) (Figure (20). (iii)Other Birds -Shorebirds Seven of the 19 species of shorebirds that occur in the upper basin are transients that occur only during migra- tion (Appendix EF).An additional six species nest in alpine tundra habitats that will be little affected by the Susitna development.Ths six species that wi 11 be most affected (semi-palmated plover,common snipe,upland s andpi per,spotted sandpi per,so 1itary sandpi per,and greater yellowlegs)nest on alluvial bars along the river edge or in lower elevation woodlands and meadows.No shorebirds overwinter in the Susitna region. Seven species of shorebirds were seen along the lower Susitna River during spring air and ground surveys (Appendix EF).Spotted sandpipers were common breeders along shores of the main river as well as along its sloughs and feeder creeks;solitary sandpipers were also fairly common along the river.Semi-palmated plovers were uncommon breeders on alluvia,and greater yellowlegs were uncommon probable breeders along the river.Winnowing common snipe were recorded at various locations.Only one migrant whimbrel was seen on an alluvial island below Talkeetna,and two female red-necked phalaropes were also seen on the river. E-3-266 ~, .... - .... -Grouse and Ptarmigan The spruce grouse and three spec i es of ptarmi gan breed and winter in the upper Susitna basin (Appendix EF).All species of ptarmigan breed at higher elevations,and thus little of their breeding habitat will be affected by the impoundments.Spruce grouse nest and winter in coni- ferous and mi xed forests and will ow and rock ptarmi gan probably move to the lower elevation conifer forests in winter.Spruce grouse were not observed along the lower Sus itna Ri ver duri ng the spring ai r and ground surveys, a1though some probably occur in the area.Small numbers of willow ptarmigan may occur along the lower river in some wi nters,but ptarmi gan are not normally found near the downstream floodplain. -Owls Three (great horned owl,hawk owl,boreal owl)of the five species of owls that have been recorded in the upper basi nare year-round residents in mixed and coniferous forests (Appendix EF).The short-eared owl,a migrant, occupies open habitats in small numbers in summer and a few may breed in the region.Snowy owls,occasional migrants or winter visitors,are rare in the upper basin and tend to occur only in tundra areas. Only single records of two species of owls (great horned owl,short-eared owl)were obtained along the lower Susitna River during the spring surveys (Appendix EF). Great horned owls are likely residents and breeders, especially in mature cottonwood stands along the river and sloughs. -Woodpeckers and Passerines In terms of numbers,woodpeckers and passerines comprise by far the greatest proportion of the birds inhabiting the upper Susitna basin.Fifty-seven species have been recorded and nine (possibly 10)of these are year-round residents (Appendix EF).All of the woodpeckers and a large proportion of the passerines are forest species, but passerines are abundant in all vegetated habitats from closed forest through shrublands to alpine tundra. Breeding densities of these terrestrial species are discussed in more detail below. A few passerines occur primarily in (or over)aquatic habitats and they are not adequately represented in censuses ·of terrestri a1 habitats.These inc lude four species of swallows and the dipper.Bank swallows and E-3-267 cliff swallows nest colonially,the former in cutbanks and the latter in areas of cliffs,and both forage large- ly over water.Tree swallows and violet-green swallows are not colonial and nest in a variety of habitats;they a 1so forage primarily over rivers and lakes.The di pper is a bird of mountain streams.It forages in the streams and nests along stream banks.Dippers are uncommon in the upper basin,but there are no quantitative estimates of numbers. Thirty-ni ne speci es of woodpeckers and passeri nes were recorded along the lower Susitna River during the spring surveys.Six,possibly seven,are year-round residents (Appendix EF).Relative abundance of some species are discussed below. -Upper Basin Bird Communities Breeding populations of terrestrial birds in the upper basin were studied in 1981 and 1982 by means of plot censuses (Kessel et al.1982,Kessel,pers.comm.).The average number of territories of each species on the census plots in the two years is shown in Table W67.The data for all species are summarized in Table W68. Generally,the forest and woodland habitats support high- er densities and/or biomasses of birds than the shrub communities.Highest densities found in forests were at a cottonwood forest plot near Sherman,which supported an average of 43.0 bird territories/10 ha.The lowest den- sities in forest habitats were in the white spruce forest plot at the mouth of Kosina Creek (16.9 territories/lO hal.Of the shrub habitats,low-mixed shrub had the highest densities (35.4 territories/10 hal and mat and cushion tundra the lowest (11.5 territories/l0 hal. Although alpine tundra areas inclUding upland cliffs and block-fields and mat and cushion tundra had the lowest bird usage,these types supported some bird species generally not found in other habitats,such as white- ta il ed ptarmi gan,horned 1ark,wheatear,water pipit, gray-crowned rosy finch,and snow bunting. The pattern of habitat occupancy in the upper basin shows many similarities to patterns found in other areas of interior Alaska and in taiga areas in general.Spruce stands with little or no understory generally support low densities of breeding birds whereas mixed forest,scat- tered woodl ands and deci duous forests generally support intermediate to high densities of birds (Gillespie 1960, Carbyn 1971,Spindler and Kessel 1980,McLaren and McLaren 1981). E-3-268 - .... - - .- , In many areas tall shrub habitats support very high den- sities of breedin~birds (Ward 1975~Spindler and Kessel 1980,McLaren and McLaren 1981)and the very low density in the Susitna tall alder shrub plot is anomalous. Kessel et a1.(1982)believed that the low density was related to the plant species composition.Alder thickets in the Tanana Valley,which support high avian densities, are dominated by willow,thinleaf alder and balsam pop- 1ar,which have average to above average levels of pri- mary productivity.The tall shrub thickets of the upper Susitna basin study area were composed almost entirely of Alnus crispa,which has relatively low levels of primary productivlty (Spindler and Kessel 1980). Density of breeding birds in most habitats declined sub- stantially between 1981 and 1982 (Table W69).The reasons for this are unknown but could be due to differ- i ng weather condit ions or differences in avai 1abi 1ity of insect food.Boreal forest bird populations are known to increase and decrease with spruce budworm cyc les (Kendei gh 1947,Erski ne 1977)and avai 1abi 1 ity of other insects may also affect population levels. Bird species diversity can be expressed either in terms of simple species richness or in terms of an index which includes other aspects of the bird community.Table W68 shows both number of species and the Shanon-Weaver di ver- s ity index.The 1atter takes into account both the num- ber of species present and the proportion of the total community represented by each species (evenness). Species diversity may be quite heterogeneous even in dif- ferent samples within the same overall habitat type (see, for example,white spruce-paper birch forest plots I and II and also Spindler and Kessel 1980).This variability is presumably due to variation in the structure,density and possibly species composition of pl ants forming the habitat. Despite the variability in diversity estimates based on relatively small plots,some patterns are apparent. Forest habitats generally have higher diversities than shrub or tundra habitats,whereas shrub habitats general- ly have higher diversities than tundra habitat.This agrees with the general observation that species diver- sity increases with the number of layers in the vegeta- tion (MacArthur and MacArthur 1961,Karr and Roth 1971, Wi llson 1974).There are,however,two anomal ies--the relatively high diversities in dwarf black spruce forest (woodland black spruce),which lacks a tree £-3-269 overstory,and high diversities in tall alder shrub stands.Despite the 1 ack of a tree overstory in dwarf black spruce forest,the same general characteristics of a coniferous tree habitat with deciduous shrub understory are present,but si de-by-si de rather than 1 ayered. McLaren and McLaren (1978),working in the eastern Canadi an boreal forest,found that dwarf spruce forests with a substantial deciduous shrub component had a high density and a very similar diversity to taller spruce forests with deciduous understory. The high diversity in tall deciduous shrub habitat al so seems to be a general characteristic of boreal shrub com- muniti es (cf.McLaren and McLaren 1978,Spi ndl er and Kessel 1980).The reasons for this high djversity are not known,but may be related to the tendency for decid- uous shrub communities to occur near water.MacArthur (1964)found that presence of water tended to increase bird species diversity over what would have been expected on the basis of habitat structure alone. Each habitat type that has been studi ed in the upper basi n supports a moderately di sti nct bird speci es asso- ciation,as indicated by the following list of the four or five most abundant s'Pecies in each habitat: Upland Cliffs and B10ck-fields:gray-crowned rosy finch,common redpoH,horned lark,American golden plover,water pi pit; •Dwarf Shrub Mat:water pipit,American golden plover, horned 1ark,Lapl and longspur,rock ptarmi gan; •Low Shrub:savannah sparrow,tree sparrow,Lapland 1 ongspur,white-crowned sparrow; •Medium Shrub:tree sparrow,white-crowned sparrow, savannah sparrow,arctic warbler,Wilson's warbler; •Tall Shrub:hermit thrush,Wilson's warbler,fox sparrow,white-crowned sparrow,tree sparrow; •Scattered Woodl and and Dwarf Forest: sparrow,American robin,bohemian sparrow,ruby-crowned kinglet; white-crowned waxwi ng,tree •Mi xed Deci duous-Coni ferous Forest:hermit thrush, dark-eyed junco,yellow-rumped warbler,Swainson's thrush,var i ed thrus h; •Deciduous Forest:yellow-rumped warbler,common red- poll,Swainson's thrush,blackpoll warbler;and E-3-270 ~i ~- Coniferous Forest: thrush,dark-eyed Swainson's thrush. ruby-crowned kinglet,varied junco,yellow-rumped warbler, ~ [. -LowerSusitna River Floodplain Bird Communities Information on the relative abundance and habitat use of terrestrial birds in the lower Susitna River floodplain was obtained during a ground survey conducted in June 1982 by the University of Alaska Museum.Abundance was determined by counts of singing birds in each habitat type. Generally,following ecological tenets,both abundance and species richness increased progressively from the early to late vegetation successional stages (Table W68)• Species composition of the early successional stages was dominated by waterbirds,such as plovers,sandpipers, gullS,and terns.The only regular land bird was the white-crowned sparrow,which was common in the medium- height shrub of the 1ate stages of early succession. Species compos it i on and abundance in the tall shrub and forest habitats of the lower Susitna River floodplain followed known patterns of habitat selection in central Alaska,except in the cottonwood forests.Several bird species normally associated with tall shrub cOlTU11unities (i.e.,gray-cheeked thrush,bl ackpollwarbler,northern water-thrush and fox sparrow)were found to select nest- ing ·territories within riparian cottonwood forests,pro- bably because these forests have a well-developed,tall shrub understory. A profound effect of silt ground cover on avian abundance was also noted along the lower floodplain.Forest and tall shrub stands with a heavy ground cover of recently- deposited silt were essentially devoid of birdlife. Earlier studies (Spindler and Kessel 1981,Kessel et al. unpub1.data)have suggested that there is little prefer- ence by most terrestrial birds for specific taxa of plant ground cover,but apparently some ki ndof vegetative cover is necessary-"undoubtedly because of its role in providing food resources. (d)Non-Game (small)MalTU11als Non-game (small)mammals include shrews,voles,lemmings,deer mice,tree squirrels,ground squirrels,marmots,pikas,snowshoe hares,and porcupines.Small mammals,by the nature of their size E-3.,;271 and visibil ity,are not high profi le species such as many other groups of wildlife and birds.However,they are important eco- logical components of most northern ecosystems.Small rodents have been shown to be important in nutrient cycling;soil aera- tion;dispersal of seeds,mycorhizzae and spores;control of insect pests;and as the primary or secondary prey of many carni- vores (Grodzinski and Wunder 1975). Because most species of small mammals that occur in Alaska are distributed throughout a diverse array of habitats,none of the small mammal species in the Susitna basin will be seriously affected by the project.However,the loss of small mammals in the impoundment and development areas could have an effect on some carnivores (through a reduction in prey availability)and on some plant communities.Consequently,the small mammal studies con- ducted in the Susitna basin (Kessel et al.1982)have primarily addressed habitat use and estimation of relative population num- bers in different habitats. Studies of small mammals were restricted to an area ranging 15 km to either side of the Susitna River,extending from near Sherman on the west (approximately 10 km south of Gold Creek)to the Maclaren River on the east.Within this area,49 trapline tran- sects were established.Sites for the transects were selected to represent as broad a spectrum as possible of the various vegeta- tion types in the region.Details on sampling techniques are provided in Kessel et al.(1982).Information on small mammals was also obtained by opportunistic observations. (i)Species Composition and Relative Abundance During the study period,16 species of small mammals were trapped and/or observed in the upper bas in.In add it ion, there was evidence of two other species occurring in the region:bats (two separate sightings of what were probably the little brown bat),and water shrews (tracks of a small mammal between ice openings on Watana Creek).The diver- sity of small mammals documented in the upper basin is similar to known distributions in the literature.However, the occurrence of arctic shrews in the study area consti- tutes a minor range extension;the closest previous record was from Denali National Park (Murie 1962). The one spring and three fall trapline surveys involved a total of 23,061 trap nights of effort.A total of 950, 2328,and 447 small mammal specimens were captured during 1980,1981,and 1982,respectively.A total of 1977 micro- tine rodents (6 species)and 1748 shrews (4 species)were captured.Northern red-backed voles and masked shrews were the two most abundant spec i es of small mammals,together constituting 74 percent of the total captures.A total of 1458 northern red-backed voles and 1289 masked shrews were E-3-272 - - ,.,.. captured during the 1980-82 studies.Other shrews captured were arctic shrews (303 specimens),dusky shrews (146),and pyglTlY shrews (10)•Ca pt ures of microt i nes inc 1uded 224 tundra voles,103 meadow voles,148 singing voles,29 brown lemmings,and 15 northern bog lermnings (Table W70). Captureresul ts ill ustrate the 1arge popul ati on fl uctua- tions that can be observed in small mammals among and with- in years (Table W70).Number of captures during the spring were cons i stent ly lower than the preceding or succeedi ng fall periods.Fall 1982 capture level s were low for all species except singing voles,brown lemmings,and bog 1 emmi ngs.Number of captures for these 1atter three species increased gradually durin:§the study period. Masked shrew captures were particu]arly low during fall 1982 as compared to the numbers captured dur i ng fall 1980 and 1981.The northern red-backed vole was the only species to maintain its relative abundance,and in all sampling periods was the most abundant species. Si x other speci es of small mammal s were not trapped but were observed in the study area:arctic ground squirrel, hoary marmot,collared pika,red squirrel,porcupine,and snows hoe hare.Although no quanti tat i ve est i mates of abun- dance were obtai ned for these species,1imited i nformat ion on distribution was collected and is described below. The arctic ground squirrel is a numerous and ecologically important mammal of the region.The largest numbers were observed on the drier slopes,knolls,and ridges above treel i ne;only small numbers were observed at lower el eva- t ions.General observations i ndi cate that the Susitna study area supports a relatively high and stable population of ground squirrels,probably comparable to densities reported el sewhere in the state.For exampl e,in the Talkeetna Mountains to the south,Hock and Cottini (1966) removed 27 squirrel sin one day from .05 ha (54 squirrel sl ha)with little apparent decrease in numbers;the squirrel population in this area remained high throughout four years of study.In the eastern Brooks Range,Bee and Hall (1956) counted 175 ground squirrels along a 1-km ridge,and 70 squirrels on approximately 1.5 ha of hillside nearly (47 squirrels/ha). Hoary marmots were common res i dents of the al pi ne zone. Scattered co loni es were found above tree1 i nee None were seen within the proposed impoundment areas.Collared pika are another alpine species,found commonly on talus slopes at higher elevations.No pikas were seen below treeline. Densities of pikas in Denali National Park during 1962 varied from 5/ha in large rock slides,to 25lha on small, isolated rock piles. E-3-273 Red squirrels,porcupines,and snowshoe hares were general- ly confined to the forested areas of the basin.Red squirrels were present in coniferous forests throughout the area,but were most numerous in the mature spruce st ands that occur along the larger creeks such as Watana and Tsusena Creeks.Porcupines are uncommon in the study area; a few individuals were sighted during the summer of 1980, and 3 to 4 sets of tracks were seen during the winter of 1980. Snowshoe hares,a major source of food for predators over much of central Alaska,were generally restricted to areas east of Watana Creek.Localized "pockets"occurred pri- marily in the vicinities of Jay Creek,Goose Creek,and the lower Oshetna Ri ver.Snowshoe hare pOPul at ions undergo 8 to 12 year cycles of abundance (Keith and Windberg 1978); peak densities may be as high as 38.6 hares/ha whereas den- sities may drop to as low as 0.12 hares/ha during popula- tion lows (Green and Evans 1940).Long-term information on overall hare abundance,provided by several local resi- dents~indicated that the r~cent low number of hares is a chronic situation and not justa low phase of the popula- tion cycle. (i i)Habitat Use -Shrews and Voles Forty-two trapping sites were organized into floris- tically similar groups using a cluster analysis of fre- quency counts of 81 plant taxa from the vicinity of the sample sites (Figure W21).The clustered subgroups rough 1y correspond to the fo 11 owi ng veget at i on types from Viereck and Dyrness (1980):sedge-grass and shrub tundra,sedge-grass and low wi llow shrub,herbaceous- mixed low shrub meadow,open white spruce forest,wood- land spruce,black spruce bog (some low birch shrub sites were included in this group),paper birch-white spruce forest,cottonwood forest,tall alder shrub,and tall grass meadow.The number of captures of each sma11 mammal species rel ative to these vegetation types is shown in Figure W22. Shrews and red-backed voles in the upper basin displ ayed a relatively broad and uniform distribution pattern across the habitat landscape (Figure W22).Masked shrews,the numerically dominant shrew species,occurred at all trapping sites.They were most numerous in decid- uous forest (part i cul arly cottonwood),grassl and,and tall shrub sites.Arctic shrews occurred at 29 trapline sites,with peaks of abundance on the drier non-forested sites,particularly grassland (at low elevations)and low E-3-274 - ~L - .... ,~, shrub (above treeline).Dusky shrews were thinly distri- buted across the vegetat i on types of the study area. Although dusky shrews were captured at 23 sites,no par- t i cul ar preferences were apparent;however,none were captured in the wettest sites.The few captures of pygmy shrews in cottonwood forest (3 specimens),white spruce forest (1),and grassl and (1)during fall 1981 and open spruce forests (5)and cottonwood forest (1)during fall 1980,suggest a restri cti on of thi s speci es to forest habitats.Northern red-backed voles,the dominant micro- tine of the region,occurred on all but five trapline sites.Northern red-backed voles were moderate to very abundant in most forest and shrub types.The greatest n umbers were recorded in open and wood 1and spruce and cottonwood forest sites.In contrast,herbaceous meadows,particularly wet meadows and paper birch forest, supported low numbers of this species. In contrast to the more general habitat occupancy pat- terns of most shrews and red-backed voles,the three Microtus spec iesdispl ayed stronger habitat specifi ci ty~ as evidenced by.their general restriction to open,non- forested sites (Figure W22).Singing voles were captured on only 10 trapline transects.They were most abundant in open low willow-birch shrub on relatively dry soils but were also found in herbaceous tundra,and mat and cushion tundra above treeline.Tundra voles and meadow voles occurred primarily in sedge and grass-forb meadows and bogs.Tundra voles were captured on 22 sites (prim- ari ly grass-forb~but al so sedge-grass),compared to 10 sites for meadow voles (primarily wet sedge-grass). Sma 11 numbers of brown 1emmi ngs were captured on 11 sites at or above tree 1i ne,usually in wet herbaceous and low shrub situations.Bog lemmings were taken at lower ele- vations in mesic sedge-grass/low shrub meadow (2 cap- tures)~grass meadow (1),and near a seepage in white spruce forest (1). To summarize the differences in habitat use among the various species of small mammals,a standardized habitat niche breadth measure was calcul ated for each species captured during fall 1981 (Table W71).The ubiquitous masked shrews and red-:backed voles had the broadest habi- tat niche breadth,followed closely by dusky shews and arctic shrews.Microtus species,particul arly singing voles,had the narrowest habitat niche breadths.along with the rare or uncommon pygmy shrews~bog lemmings,and brown lemmings. E-3-275 Small mammal community structures,especially as they relate to species dominance and habitat breadth,are highly correlated with population levels and species interactions.Because most northern microtine popula- tions undergo extreme fluctuations in density (Krebs and Myers 1974),strict ecological boundaries are difficult to delineate.A small mammal population sampled during the peak phase of a population cycle may occupy a greater range of habitats than during a popul ation low.Inter- specific competition for space may also vary with den- sity.For example,Guthrie (1965)found that open herbaceous-dominant habitats left vacant by decl ining Microtus populations,were quickly colonized and domin- ated by the northern red-backed vole suggesting that Microtus species were able to exclude northern red-backed voles from some habitats. Northern bog 1emmi ngs and brown lemmi ngs were uncommon members of the small mammal community in the Susitna basin.Bog lemmings are generally uncommon throughout their range,and little is known·of their ecological requirements (Banfield 1974,West 1979,MacDonald 1980). In other areas of the state,small numbers have been taken primari ly in shrub bogs and marshes (Osgood 1900, Dice 1921,West 1979,MacDonald 1980)--not unlike the few sites where they occurred during this study.Their diet is apparently restricted to sedges,grasses,some forbs (Cowan and Guiguet 1956)and mosses (West 1979). Although the hi gh country of the upper bas in has an apparent abundance of suitable brown lemming habitat, only small,scattered numbers were captured·during the 1980-81 study.However,they have been found in fairly 1arge numbers in other montane areas of central Alaska (R.L.Rausch pers.comm.).The low numbers in the Susitna area may be due to a failure to sample the right habitats,or,more likely,to sampling during a period of low population levels.Brown lemmings are usually asso- ci ated with wet sedge-grass tundra above treel i ne,but also are found locally at lower elevations in spruce bogs and wet meadows (Buckley and Libby 1957,Banfield 1974). This species is almost completely dependent on a diet of sedges and grasses (Guthrie 1968),although mosses may be important at times (West 1979). -Other Species Arctic ground squirrels inhabit herbaceous tundra and open shrub habitats above treel ine.At lower eleva- tions they also colonize riverbanks,lakeshores, moraines,eskers,road sidings,and other disturbed E-3-276 ~' - sites with subcl imax vegetation (Banfield 1974,Kessel et al.1982).Our observations corroborate Bee and Hall's (1956)conclusion for the Brooks Range that the optimum conditions for ground squirrel colonies are: .Loose permafrost-free soils on well-drained slopes; .Vantage points from which the surrounding terrain can be observed;and Bare soil s surrounded by veget at i on that is in an early xerosere stage of succession. Carl (1962)found that ground squirrels avoided sites where tall vegetation (greater than 20 cm)impaired vision.The effects of squirrel activity--e.g.,bur- rowing,mound building,feeding,feces deposition-- within areas of established colonies tends to maintain vegetation at an early successional stage (Carl 1962, Youngman 1975). During the snow-free months ground squirrels provide an abundant,reli ab 1e food source for a number of mamma- lian and avian predators (Carl 1962,Murie 1962,Bente 1981,Olendorff 1976).At High Lake in 1981 the first ground squirrel emerged from hibernation the third week of April;the latest date in 1981 on which ground squirrels were seen was 4 October (E.Powell,pers. comm.).These emergence and entrance dates are essen- t i ally the same as those reported by Hock (1960)and Hock and Cottini (1966)in the Talkeetna Mountains near Anchorage,and by Carl (1962)at Ogotoruk Creek,north- western Alaska. Hoary marmots and pi kas are generally restri cted to tundra/talus habitats at high elevations (Hoffman et al.1979,Kessel et al.1982).Both are ecotone species:their homes and shelters are in one habitat (rocks of various size and shape)and their food in another (herbaceous tundra types)(Broadbrooks 1965). Hock and Cottini (1966)suggested that a portion of thei rmarmot population underwent seasonal shifts in altitude,moving down from high rocky slopes in fall to sites having better conditions for winter denning and having an avai 1able food supply in early spring.An opposite seasonal movement apparent ly OCcurs in some Montana hoary marmot colonies (Barash 1974).The only suggestion of fall movement in the upper basin was the observation of several marmot trails and a single marmot traversing the 1067 m-high valley near Swimming Bear Lake (WB 150)in about 8 cm of snow on 10 October 1980 (T.Hobgood,pers.comm.).Marmots hibernate longer than ground squirrels;in the Talkeetna Moun- t ai ns near Anchorage,marmots emerge from hi bernat i on E-3-277 during the first third of May and begin entering hiber- nacula in early September (Hock and Cottini 1966). Pikas are active throughout the year (Sheldon 1930, Broadbooks 1965,Hock and Cottini 1966),and store large quantities of dried plant material in late summer for use during the winter months. The arboreal red squirrel occupies a variety of forest habitats,but prefers mature coniferous forest (Cowan and Guiguet 1956).White spruce forest is generally considered the optimal habitat in interior Alaska (e.g.,Nadler 1973).Red squirrels feed primarily on the seeds of spruce,particul arly white spruce,but supplement their diet with fungi,fruits,and even the buds of spruce and aspen (Smith 1967,Nodler 1973). They store large quantities of spruce cones and mush- rooms in middens for winter use (Murie 1927,Streubel 1968).Buskirk (pers.comm.)noted that red squirrel middens in the upper basin in fall 1981 appeared to be composed only of mushrooms and spruce bu"ds.A mass i ve cone crop failure caused by an area-wide epidemic of white spruce needl e rust (Chrysomyxa 1edi co 1a)during 1980 (J.H.McBeath,University of Alaska,Agric.Expt. St at ion,pers.comm.)may exp 1a in why squ i rre 1s were storing such low qual ity food as spruce buds (Smith 1967).Smith (1967)reported a 67 percent drop in a red squirrel population following the second year of a t wo-year cone crop f ai 1ure in white spruce forest and suggested that the squi rre 1shad emi grated into sur- rounding black spruce stands.Repeated cone crop fail ures caul d have simi 1ar effects on red squi rre 1s in the upper basin. Porcupines occupy a broad range of forest and shrub habitats (Woods 1973).In mountainous regions they prefer heavily wooded forests during the winter (Hock and eottini 1966,Harder 1979),but may occasionally be found above treeline,even during the coldest months (Irving and Krog 1955).Porcupines were only occasion- ally found in forested areas of the upper basin. In interior Alaska,Wolff (1977)found that snowshoe hare habitat preference depended on population density; during population lows,hares were restricted to dense black spruce forest and willow-alder thickets,but dur- ing highs they used a wider variety of vegetation types,including recently burned areas with minimal cover.He cone 1uded that a patchy envi ronment of re- cently burned sites with inclusions of unburned spruce was the preferred hare habitat.The chronic scarcity of snowshoe hares in the upper basin is probably related to a scarcity of suitable habitat.Recent burns and riparian shrub thickets are noticeably absent from this area. E-3-278 ~, .- 4.3 Impacts (a)Watana Development - - ..... - (1)Moose Moose are common in the Susitna Ri ver valley and are one of the most important wildlife species that will be affected by the Watana project.Activities associ ated with the con- struction of the Watana project will affect moose mostly in areas adj acent to and wi th in the d am and impoundment area. Activities associated with the filling and operational phases will affect moose in both the upper and lower Susitna basi ns.The construction and operation of the Devi 1 Canyon dam,access routes to the development sites, and transmission lines also will affect moose in the Sustina basin;impacts resulting from these activities are discussed later •Although the Watana proj ect may benefit moose in some areas of the ·Susitna basin,detrimental effects of the project will likely result in a decline in the number of moose and altered distributions of this speci es throughout the basi n.Because both mi gratory and resident populations of moose utilize areas in the imme- diate vicinity of the proposed impoundment area (Ballard et a1.1982.),impacts associ ated with each phase of the pro- ject could influence moose populations in other drainages removed from the Susitna basin. In this discussion,impacts of the Susitna project on moose wi 11 be assessed by determining the extent (temporal and spatial)to which carrying capacity for moose is reduced within the basin,and by the effect on population regula- tory mechanisms (Figures ).The effects of develop- ments that reduce carrying capacity or productivity of moose populations for a long period (i .e.,more than 10 years)wi 11 be considered as severe impacts.Moderate impacts may either affect a 1arge proport i on of the moose population for a short period (less than 5 years)or a smaller proportion of the population for long periods. Minor impacts will include very short term (less than 1 year)effects. The direct impacts that wi 11 most severely affect moose population in the Susitna basin are,in order of decreasing severity,permanent loss of habitat,blockage of tradi- tional migration routes,disturbance by machines and humans,hazards assoc i ated with the drawdown zone and alteration of habitat.The major secondary impact of the Watana development will be the provision of access to a previously remote area,and a substantial increase in hunt i ng pressure wi th subsequent increases in moose mor- tal ity. E-3-279 It is not possible,with currently available information, to reliably estimate the total numbers of moose that will be directly or indirectly affected by the Watana project. Ball ard et al.(l982a)estimated that about 2400 moose would have home ranges that overlap an 8 km zone sur- rounding the impoundment area.This estimate was based on 162 radio-collared moose from an estimated regional popu~ lation of 4500 (total estimate for the Upper Susitna River Basin).Although this estimate is biased (see Ballard et al.1982a for a discussion),it does provide a rough esti- mate of the number of moose that may be affected by the project in the upper basin. The eventual fate of the estimated 2400 moose having home ranges that over1 ap the 8 km zone around the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon projects is unknown;some will successfully di sperse to other parts of the Susitna basi n or to adj acent drai nages,some may adapt to di sturbances and wi 11 remai n in the immed i ate vi ci nity of the impoundment,and some will die as an indirect or direct result of the development. Current studies will greatly refine this assessment. -Construction Construction of the Watana dam will involve intense con~ struction activities at the actual damsite,establishment of temporary camps and a permanent townsite,removal of forest cover in most parts of the impoundment,and the excavation and transportation of borrow materi al.The major impacts on moose during construction will be habi- tat loss or alteration,disturbance,interference with seasona 1 movement s,and mort a1ity associ ated with con- struction activities and hunting. Habi tat Loss Cl eari ng of the impoundment area,townsite,local transportation corridors,and operational areas will result in the permanent loss of some high quality habi- tat for moose in the upper Susitna basin.Campsites, borrow pits,and construction access roads will tempor- arily alienate smaller areas of habitat from moose use. There is no quest i on that moose wi 11 be affected by this loss of habitat;browse availability will be reduced,wintering range,calving areas and breeding areas wi 11 be lost,movements may be altered as a result of behavioral or physical barriers,animals will be more vulnerable to predation and hunting (as a result of the loss of cover),and repeated human and mechanical disturbances may preclude use of some areas by moose.Accidental fires may also temporarily eliminate moose habitat,although in the long term E-3-280 ~, ~, - .... - would provide additional areas of high quality browse to moose. Clearing of the impoundment area will remove a wide range of riparian,deciduous forest,coniferous forest, and muskeg communities which are important to moose during all or part of the year.Although some areas may develop sparse successional growth prior to flood- ing;inundation will eventually permanently destroy these habitats.The distribution and occurrence of major plant communities in the Watana development area are discussed in Section 3.2(a). As discussed earlier (Section 4.2(a),(i)),current maps of forest cover types are poor measures of moose habitat quality.Forest cover types are based on the dominant tree species in the forest canopy and do not adequate ly assess shrub di stri buti ons and abundance. As a result,most browse components of moose habitat are not accurately characterized by forest canopy units at this time.Vegetation studies to determine· forage quality are planned,but until that information is available,assessments must be based upon the existing information.Moose habitat use (Ballard et a1.1982a)and plant community distributions (McKendrick et al.1982)were assessed on the basis of forest cover units,and therefore the following assess- ment ut il i zes forest cover units to determi ne the potenti al effects of habitat loss on moose. To obtain a crude estimate of the importance of habitat loss to moose in the upper basin,we examined the pro- portionate losses pf forest cover types in relation to their regional availability and the proportionate use of these forest cover types by moose during the spring, summer-fall,and winter periods (Table E.3.W72). Because summaries of moose relocations -were provided for all of the upper Susitna basin (i .e.,the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon deve 1oprnent areas),it was not pos- sible to separately examine the proportionate use of cover types by moose in each of the two areas. Proport i onate losses of major cover types in re 1ati on to their availability in the Watana watershed indicate that 62%of the birch forests and 33%of the mixed forest communities wi 11 be removed by i nundat i on. About %of spruce forest and 5%of bi rch shrub cover types also will be lost.All of the plant com- munities lost will be lower elevation areas. E-3-281 Wi nter Use -There is a general consensus that moose populations in North America are ultimately limited by the availability and quality of winter range (Coady 1982).Hi gh qua 1ity wi nter range of moose is char- acteri zed by (1)abundant trees and shrubs that are most preferred by moose as winter browse.(2)consis- tently low snow depths in relation to surrounding areas,and (3)good interspersion of young seral growth (for foraging)and older aged forest stands (for cover) (leResche et ale 1974.Peek 1974).The nutritional quality of browse (e.g.,amounts of crude protein, fats.and carbohydrates,digestibility,total cal- ories),also is important in determining the quality of winter range (Oldenmeyer 1974).Other factors such as predat ion,hunti ng mortal i ty,di sease,and weather may reduce moose populations below the carrying capacity of the range (Figure 3._). Although the quality and quantity of winter range is likely the limiting determinant for carrying capacity of moose,it is critical to moose survival only duri ng severe wi nters and may not be a preferred habitat or forage.Winter severity,particularly snow depth, strongly i nfl uences the use of wi nter browse by moose (Coady 1974;leResche et ale 1974).During mild winters when snow depths are low throughout much of the range,few moose may utilize critical winter ranges. Our i ng severe wi nters,however,deep snows may force high numbers of moose to overwinter in limited areas. The limiting effect of critical winter range may thus only be evident during periods of severe wi nter condi- t ions. Although not observed during current moose studies in the upper ·Susitna basin (Ballard et ale 1982a), earlier studies of moose in the basin (U.S.Fish and wildlife Service 1975,Ballard and Taylor 1980)suggest that duri ng severe wi nters with heavy snowfa 11,moose move from upland shrublands to mixed spruce deciduous woodlands at lower elevation.Mild winters with lim- ited snow cover duri ng 1980 and 1981 are thought to have resulted in the use of upland areas by moose in the Susitna Bas in and their absence from lower el eva- tion sites.A census of the Watana impoundment on March 25,1982 (a time when most moose that used the impoundment area in that year waul d be found there) determi ned that 260 moose occurred in the Watana im- poundment area.The Watana impoundment area includes several large areas of river valley bottomland that are probably critical to moose survival during severe wi nters.Observations of intense browsi ng of bottom- land shrubs by ungulates (McKendrick et ale 1982) support this suggestion and indicate that browse re- sources in bottoml and areas may presently be at,or near,their carrying capacity. E-3-282 "'." - .... - - Because low elevation riparian shrub,deciduous forest, coniferous forest,and muskeg habit ats wi 11 not be avai 1ab 1e in areas adj acent to the impoundment,the removal of these habitats by initi al clearing activi- ties and 1ater f1 oodi ng wi 11 depri ve moose of a 1arge area of high quality winter range.Assuming that bottom1 and browse resources throughout the upper Susitna basin are presently fully ut-i1ized by moose, c1eari ng and f1 oodi ng of the impoundment wi 11 force moose to depend on and likely over-utilize the remain- ing winter range.Increased mortality can be expected due to st arv at i on and increased pred at i on. E-3-283 repeatedly by individual cows.Predation upon moose ca 1 ves by brown bears is a maj or mortal i ty factor of moose during the spring and summer (Ballard et a1. 1980),and displacement of parturient cow moose from calving areas may increase the vulnerability of their calves to predation. Summer and Fall Use -Because most moose in the upper Susitna basin commonly move to upland shrub habitats during summer and fall,loss of bottomland communities will not have serious effects on summer and fall habi- tat use.However,some moose remain in the valley bottoms throughout the year and would be displaced from their summer and fall range. Although repeated human and mechanica 1 di sturbances could result in an alteration of activity budgets and so reduce the amount of time that is available for growth,survival,and production,a more serious imme- diate impact is the alienation of some portions of the range as a result of possible avoidance of human acti- vityareas.Prolonged avoidance may result in an effective loss of habitat and animals may concentrate in limited areas of prime range or subsist on marginal range.Either scenario could result in a reduction in carrying capacity and eventual population declines (Sopuck et ale 1979). Moose appear to be more tol erant of di sturbances than most ungulates (Tracy 1977),particularly if distur- bances are predictable,neutral stimul i such as moving vehicles (Kucera 1976;Schultz and Bailey 1978).Cow- cal f pairs generally respond more strongly than bull s and cows without calves (Tracy 1977).If moose are not directly approached by humans or machi nes,they appear to tolerate even moderate and high activity levels. For example,repeated aerial surveys of moose in the vicinity of the Revelstoke hydroe1etric project in British Columbia over a five-year period that spanned pre-construction and construction phases,indicated that moose·numbers had not changed des pi te frequent blasting and heavy industrial activity (R.Bonar,pers. comm.).Observations of moose.including cows and calves,in close proximity to active oil sands extract- ion plants in northern Alberta despite frequent mechan- ical disturbances and blasting,support this obser- vation (J.Green,pers.comm.).However,toleration E-3-284 ~I - '"'" - ,tII(W:, ~I - - of such act iv it i es by moose appears to occur on 1yi n the absence of hi gh 1eve 1s of human harassment and hunting.Moose can be expected to strongly avoid human activity areas if harassment and hunting commonly occur. Assuming that the Watana dam construction site and associated facilities are restricted to as small an area as possi b1e and that hunt i ng and harassment is prohibited~moose will probably continue to utilize forested areas near these sites.If hunting is permitted~moose will avoi d the major act i vity centers ~ resulting in an additional loss of habitat beyond that associ ated with on 1y the impoundment and construct ion areas. Because the clearing of the impoundment will involve noisy and unpredictable disturbances~moose will probably avoid the areas of active clearing.As a result of avoiding these disturbances as well as a lack of cover in cleared sites~moose will gradually concentrate in areas adjacent to the impoundment during -t he three to four year c1eari ng program.The concentrat i on of moose in these areas wi 11 increase intraspecific competition for food and space.In turn~ mortality of moose as a result of starvation and predation may increase~natality may decrease~and carrying capacity and population productivity will gradually decline. Aircraft enroute to or from the Watana ai rstri p may cause minor disturbances to moose.In genera1~most aircraft are expected to maintain high altitudes except d uri ng 1 andi ng and t ake-off ~and wi 11 not be a major disturbance stimuli.Frequent~low-altitude flights by fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters may elicit panic responses in moose.Because the intensity of reactions to aircraft by ungulates is influenced by such factors as the time of year~distance of the aircraft from the anima1s~group size~sex and age composit1on~type of aircraft~activity of the anima1s~and the type of terrain (Sopuck et al.1979)~it is difficult to generalize potential impacts on moose of repeated ai rcraft di sturbance.The use of wooded areas on or in the immediate vicinity of several international ai rports in Canada~suggests that if moose are not harassed~they do habituate to even low altitude and frequent overflights of aircraft (Green 1981). E-3-285 .Interference With Seasonal Movements Watana impoundment may interfere with ri ver crossi ngs and seasonal movement s of moose in the upper bas in. Clearing of the impoundment area will not physically obstruct movements but may interfere with these move- ments as a result of moose avoiding active clearing operations or the expansive clear-cut areas.Increased vi sual exposure to predators and hunters may i nhi bit moose from crossing these cleared areas.Several studi es have documented avoi dance of 1arge clear-cut areas by moose (Hamilton and Drysdale 1975;Parker and Morton 1978;Tomm 1978);in general,moose appear reluctant to enter areas where they would be far (i .e., more than 150-200 m)from forest cover.Fo 11 owi ng filling,the Watana impoundment will constitute a greater obstac 1e to seasonal movements of moose than did the river.A more detailed discussion of the effects of the Watana development on seasonal movements is discussed below under Filling and Operation. Mortality Although a few moose may be ki lled as a result of co1- 1isionswith vehicles or other accidents associated with construction activities,the effect of these mor- talities on moose populations will be negligible.The most serious mortality factor associated with the con- struction of the ~~atana Dam probably would be the increase in hunting associated with the influx of people into a previously remote area.Effects of increased hunting on moose are described more fully in Section 4.3 (c),(i). Alteration of Habitat Alteration of habitat arlSlng from construction activi- ties will be minima1.Some alterations may actually benefi t moose but the si ze of these areas wi 11 be insignificant in relation to the overall size of the project.Successional growth of herbs and shrubs in temporari 1y cleared areas such as borrow pits,con- struction roads,and campsites will provide some addi- tional new forage for moose,assuming that moose return to these areas.More forage may be available for a short period in the cleared impoundment area following clearing and before filling. E-3-286 - - - - - -Filling and Operation Ouri ngthe fi 11 i ng and operations phases of the Wat ana development,the major impacts to moose will be permanent loss of habitat,alteration of habitats upstream and downstream of the damsite,b lockage of movements,di stur- bance,and increased accidents and hunting mortality . .Permanent Loss of Habitat As flooding of the impoundment area proceeds,a variety of bottomland and low elevation habitats along the Susitna River will be permanently lost.As already di scussed for the construct ion phase of the project, clearing of the impoundment area will result in a sub- stantial reduction of the value of these areas to moose.By the time these areas are flooded,few or no moose may be ut il i zi ng these areas.However,the i m- poundment wi 11 prevent any successi ona 1 growth from becoming established and will permanently alienate the area from moose use.The consequences of the loss of these low elevation areas has already been di scussed. As a result of the habitat loss,moose wi 11 be forced into adjacent areas.Although it has not been possible to determine the distance moose will disperse from the impoundment area,it is clear that densities in adja- cent ares will increase rapidly during the ~learing and filling of the impoundment.Hunting guides in the vicinity of the W.A.C.Bennett dam in northern British Co 1umbi a reported an increase harvest of moose in areas near the impoundment for a few years following flooding (K.Child,pers.comm.).Increased moose densities could result in a decline in habitat quality in adja- cent areas.Information on browse uti 1i zation and availability is now being analyzed for the upper Susitna study area.If over-utilization of food resources,particularly winter browse (generally con- ceded to be a major limiting factor in moose popula- tions)occurs,increased mortality and decreased pro- ductivity can be anticipated. During the operation of the Watana dam,a maximum draw- down of 29 m will create an unvegetated shoreline zone that in the Watana Creek area may be over 1 km wide. The area wi 11 be covered duri ng the 1ate spri og to early summer,and will be exposed gradually during the late summer,fall,and winter periods.Although a few herbs and forbs may become established during early summer,most of the area wi 11 remain a bare mud slope. E-3-287 Fine material will gradually move downslope so that much of the upper drawdown zone wi 11 eventually be composed of coarser material.Except during crossings of the reservoir,it is unl ikely that moose will ut il i ze the drawdown area.Hazards of the drawdown area to moose movements are discussed below • •Alteration of Habitats The Watana Project will result in the alteration of plant cOlTDllunities in both the upstream and downstream Susitna basins (Section 3.3 (a)).These alterations will affect moose use of existing habitats and may have some effects on the long-term productivity of popula- t ion s. UEper Susitna Basin -Based on analyses of home ranges and seasonal movements (Ball ard et ale 1982a),moose commonly utilize lower elevation habitats in close proximity to the future impoundments.Vegetation in the areas immediately adjacent to the impoundment may be altered as a result of several mechanisms such as minor changes in seasonal temperatures,wind direction and speed,and ice fog preventing direct sunlight from reaching the ground (see Section 3.3 (a)). If the proposed reservoirs decrease either spri ng day- time temperatures {Baxter and Glaude 1980)or insola- tion,the spring green-up period may be delayed.This phenomenon is compl i cated by the fact that some pl ants use photoperiod rather than temperature to trigger early spring growth (see Section 3.3).Parturient cow moose,as well as male and young moose,were observed to move down to lower elevation areas of the Susitna River during the early spring,presumably to utilize the early emerging vegetation.Assuming that the timing of the spring green-up is important to the con- dition of parturient cows and the survival of their calves,any delay in green-up may reduce the survival of calves.If moose are forced to utilize higher elevation areas where green-up is later (in comparison to low elevation sites),a reservoir-mediated delay in green-up would further aggravate problems of nutrition- al stress during the spring period. Erosi on of the impoundment shore wi 11 1ikely occur during the period of maximum fill until the new banks become stabilized.In particular,permafrost slumping along the south shore of the impoundment may eliminate large areas of habitat along the shore.Areas of suc- cessi ona 1 vegetation,favorabl e to moose,may devel cp on these areas along the shores of the reservoir. E-3-288 - .... ..... - ..... Lower Susitna Basin -Changes in the flow regime will alter the avallability and local distribution of impor- tant moose habitat in the lower Susitna basin.The hydrological changes wi 11 vary considerably along the lower reaches of the Susitna River due to the diluting effect of tributaries as well as changing channel mor- phology (see Section 3.3 (a)).Differences between pre-and post-project flow regimes wi 11 be greatest upstream of Talkeetna,whereas downstream of the Yentna Ri ver confl uence,few changes are expected in channe 1 morphology,frequency of flooding,or vegetational suc- cession.Post-project ri ver stage downstream of Talkeetna wi 11 be less than lower than natural con- ditions (see Section 3.2). Any changes in vegetation resulting from the project are expected to have either a positive effect,or no effect,on the moose popul at ion between Devi 1 Canyon and Talkeetna during the license period.Much of this river reach is bordered by steep side slopes with only small quantities of moose browse.Newly-exposed areas immediately adjacent to the river channel will usually have a gravel or cobble substrate.Vegetation develop- ment will still be in the mid-successional stages favored by moose by the end of the license period. The extent of early successi ona 1 areas created by ice scouri ng in the Devi 1 Canyon-Tal keetna reaches of the river may be reduced slightly as a result of reduced spring flows,but because ice production in Devil Canyon is expected to continue near existing levels unt il the Devil Canyon dam is constructed,i ce-scouri ng of the river banks will continue. Female moose in the area north of Ta 1keetna appeared to move to and use riparian habitats and river islands during the calving period (Modafferi 1982).Islands appeared to be particularly good calving areas,perhaps as a result of lower numbers of predators (Stringham 1974).Lower flows in the Susitna River resulting from the Watana project likely will result in a redis- tribution of riparian and island habitats,rather than substantially altering their composition or abundance. Lowered river flows will probably result in early suc- cessional vegetation becoming established on the newly-exposed portions of the bank and a gradual suc- cession to climax vegetation in existing riparian stands.Most river islands will expand in size,thus providing more calving areas.If any islands become connected to the river banks,their value as calving areas may decrease . E-3-289 It is anticipated that the frequency of bankfull floods in the lower reaches of the Su sitna between Talkeetna and Cook In let wi 11 decrease from one flood in two years to one flood every 5-10 years (Bredthanuer and Drager 1982).This win permit riparian communities to become established in more frequently-scoured areas and may result in a net increase in riparian habitats. Because flooding wi 11 continue,albeit at a less fre- quent interval,renewal of riparian areas in the Ta 1keetna-Cook In 1et reaches of the Susitna Ri ver is not expected to change. Some icing of vegetation is expected to occur wherever open water persists,such as in the reach immediately downstream of the Watana dam.It is not known how far back from the river that icing will occur;local air temperature,wind direction and speed,length of open water and other environmental factors wi 11 determine the extent of the i ci ng effect.At the Peace Canyon Dam icing has been limited to the canyon immediately adjacent to the open water (R.Movold pers comm.) Although icing of vegetation may reduce the avail- ability of winter browse to moose,and could influence plant abundance and species composition over a long period,it is unlikely that the area of shrub commun- ities that may be affected will be of sufficient size to substantially affect the availability of winter range for moose . .Blockage of Movements Information on seasonal movements of moose in the upper basin identified several sites along the river where moose crossi ngs tended to be concentrated,Ball ard et a 1.(1982a).Dependi ng on the time of year,moose attempting to cross the impoundment would encounter open water or uncertain ice conditions.Because all of the recorded moose crossings of the Susitna River during 1980-81 occurred during May to November,moose will most commonly encounter open water conditions.In addition,these animals would have to descend over mud flats or ice blocks within the drawdown area.Percen- tage slopes of the drawdown area in the Watana impound- ment will range from less than 5 percent to as high as 115 percent (Hanscom and Osterkamp 1980).As a result of both the physical and visual barrier effects of the impoundment,it is likely that some moose movement will be blocked by or the impoundment. Moose in British Columbia do not seem to cross the open river area below dams in winter (Harper,pers.comm.). The stretch of open ri ver between Watana and Devi 1 Canyon duri ng wi nter will interfere wi th moose cros- sings during that season. £-3-290 """,, ""'" - - - ..... - - Moose in Alaska are adapted to and are dependent on seral habitats for at least a portion of their seasonal range (LeResche et al.1974).With the exception of riparian zones,which are seral communities with pre- dictable locations,most successional communities are products of random events such as forest fires,slides or storms.To utilize new successional areas,moose must maintain some degree of flexibi lity in their sea- sonal and regi ona 1 movement patterns.If seasonal movements of moose is blocked or altered by the pro- ject,it is not known whether these changes will have major detrimental effects on the local or regional moose populations.It is possible then that surviving moose in the vicinity of the impoundment will alter seasonal movements and crossings to maximize use of the remaining browse and forage supplies. Blockage of seasonal movements,particularly to winter ranges or to calving areas,could severely affect moose populations if no alternative ranges are were avail- ab 1e.Moose di str;buti ons duri ng 1980 suggested that relatively high concentrations of moose overwintered on both sides of the proposed impoundment.Locatjons of moose during the calving period similarly suggested that although moose were located more often to the north of the impoundment,animals probably calved on both sides of the impoundment.Relocations of moose duri ng 1981-82 suggest that although some moose cross the Susitna River to winter or calve,suitable habitat for calving and wintering are available on both sides of the valley.Moose have been known to starve to death ina tradi t i anal foragi ng area,even though adequate habitat occur nearby (Ballard,pers.comm.). Additional information on the availability of critical winter range and calving habitats following flooding is being obtained to more accurately assess the impacts of interference with seasonal movements . .Di sturbance Mechanical and human disturbance should decline in the impoundment and construct ion areas once the Watana dam is operational.Although it is not known to what extent the region wi 11 be used for recreational activ- ities,increased access will increase levels of distur- bance through at a 1eve 1 lower than duri ng construc- tion.If animals are not directly harassed,distur- bances during the filling and operation stages,with the exception of hunting,will at most have a slight effect on moose distributions. E-3-291 ·Mortality During the filling and operational phases of the Watana project,hunting mortality of moose may be much greater than current levels.Construction workers may hunt, and improved access will permit hunters to reach many more areas within the Susitna basin.Hunting pressure will likely increase rapidly during the first five to ten years of the project and increased kills of moose are expected.Hunting may help to remove displaced animals from the remaining range (assuming adjacent areas are over-utilized as a result of moose dispersal from the impoundment area). Some mortality of moose may result from animals being injured on ice shelves,falling through the ice after the water level has been drawn down (Harper,pers. comm.),or from animals becoming mired in the drawdown area.Moose have a1 so become trapped and drowned in floating debris within impoundments (K.Child,pers. camm.).The number of moose accidently killed as a result of the fi lling or operation of the Watana project will likely be small and the effect on the pop- ulation will be minimal.However,highway or railroad k i 11 s associ ated wi th the project may be substantial (see below). -Quantification of Project Effects The loss or alteration of moose habitat in the upper basin during both winter and summer has been identified as the major impact of the project on moose.The popula- tion-based studies conducted to date indicate the magni- tude of use of areas by the existing populations during the study,but do not allow a quantitative assessment of the potential of the habitat to support moose under vary- ing environmental conditions.To estimate moose carrying capacity in the Susitna project area,a moose bi 0-ener- getics model is being developed.This habitat-based assessment,in combination with the population-based assessment current ly underway,shoul d provi de a strong basis for impact prediction and mitigation planning. Carryi ng capacity mode 1s based upon the nutri ent requi re- ments of the animal and the capacity of the range to supply these necessary nutrients have recently been developed (Moen 1973,Wallmo et al.1977,Mautz 1978). The nutritional interfaces between the an-imal and range are forage selection,ingestion and digestion.Forage quality can be assured by measuring available nitrogen and energy.Other nutritional entities are requisite to the health of wi ld ungul ates,but they are seldom the 'limiting factor.A simulation model of ruminant energy and nitrogen balance developed by D.M.Swift (1981)has E-3-292 - - ~\ """' .... ~-I been adapted to moose (Regelin et al.1981,Schwartz et al.1981).This model predicts rates of daily forage intake and changes in body weight and composition of an individual moose based upon the composition and quality of ingested forage.The basic research necessary to adapt the model to moose was conducted at the Moose Research Center near Soldotna,Al aska~during the past fi ve years.Requi red i nformat i on to.adapt the model to moose included moose energy and protein requirements~ digestive capacity,reumen turnover time,rate of pas- sage~and partitioning of energy from gross energy intake to net energy available for production (Regelin,pers. comm.). Specific information on the range nutrient supply must be collected from each area where carrying capacity is to be predicted.The data needs are the amount of avai lable forage,quality of the forage and food habits of moose. The data are first used in the ruminant sub-model to predict daily intake rates.A separate model (Hobbs 1982)then estimates the potenti al carrying capacity of the area.The total amount of digestible energy and crude protein avai 1able to moose is ca1cul ated.The carrying capacity is determined by dividing the daily requirements for digestible energy and crude protein into the total amount available.Separate estimates are made, based upon crude protein and digestible energy.Carrying capacity can be expressed as the number of moose days of use or the number ·of moose.Carrying capacity can be predicted for summer or winter periods . The ruminant sub-model has been adapted to moose and pro- duces realistic outputs;however,the model has not been validated under field conditions.There are currently plans to validate the model using moose within four 1 mi 2 pens at the Kenai Moose Range.Potential carrying capacity will be predicted in each enclosure,and each will be stocked with moose at different densities.The moose will be weighed periodically to determine if the sub-model correctly predicts changes in the body wei ght. Specific data needed to quantify the carrying capacity of moose within the "impact zone"of the Susitna Dam project are listed below (Regelin,pers.comm.): .Detai led vegetation maps of the area within 8 km of the Watana impoundment area.The areal extent of each vegetation type must be calculated and the spatial distr'ibution of each type must be determined. Standing crop biomass of moose forage within each vege- tat i on type must be determi ned through appropri ate sampling methods. E-3-293 ·Food habits of moose during October,February,May,and July need to be determined.Fresh fecal pellets should be collected at each season and analyzed by the micro- histological technique to determine food habits. ·Seasonal nutritional quality of moose forge needs to be measured.Important forage species (4-6 species) should be collected during October 1982,May and July 1983.Only plant parts eaten should be collected from several locations within the area.Samples should be ground ina Wi 1ey mi 11 and analyzed for N content and in vitro digestibility.Moose rumen fluid should be utilized in the in vitro digestion process., ·Average dai 1y temperature and wi nd speed at or near the damsite should be collected. -Watana:Summary of Impacts The construction and operation of the Watana dam will have severe impacts on moose populations in the upper Susitna basin.Based on the number of moose affected and the duration of the impact,the major impacts 0 the Watana development are,i3n order of decreasing severity, loss of critical habitats by clearing and inundation, blockage of movements,disturbance,accidental mortality, alteration of habitat,and increased hunting mortality. Clearing and inundation will permanently destroy large areas of habitat that are regionally important as winter range,calving areas,and breeding areas.Although moose may not be directly killed by these impacts,dispersal of moose from the impoundment area will result in increased moose dens i ti es in surround i ng areas and an increased potential for over-utilization of browse and intra- specific competition for space.In turn,these effects will probably result in increased mortality associated with nutritional stress and predation,decreased natality,and,hence,lowered productivity. Blockage of movements may have moderate to severe impact on moose if alternative areas for wintering,calving and breeding are not readi ly avai lable for migratory subpopu- 1 ations of moose that cross the Susitna River.The combi ned effects of hunt i ng,di sturbance and acci dental mortality may aggravate the effects of interference with movements. Di sturbances and accidental mortality may affect a small number of moose throughout the duration of the project. The effects of these impacts on population productivity or carrying capacity will be minimal,if at all detect- able. £-3-294 - .... I I I (i i) Alteration of habitat may adversely affect moose in some areas of the upper basin if green-up,snow-melt,and habitat composition is altered great ly by the impound~ ment.In contrast,moose downstream may benefi t from an increase in the extent of riparian habitats during the license period. Increased pub 1i c access to the construction area wi 11 result ~n increased hunting pressure and increased hunter mortality.In addition,d~sturbance/harassment of moose by hunters will result in avoidance of more accessible areas,effectively resulting in an adc1it~onal loss of habitat to that di scussed above.Hunt i ng pressure is anticipated to persist ~ndefinitelyin the area unless prohibited by government regulations or area closures. However,because hunting mortality can be easily regula- ted,thi s wi 11 not necessari ly be a major impact. Caribou -Construction Construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the Watana Dam are unlikely to greatly affect caribou of the Nelchina herd. The construction site will remove only a small portion of ~l1frequently used habitat.Although some caribou may encounter and avoid areas of intensive human activity, thi s should not result in any popul at ion effects.Pro- posed borrow sites also cover a relatively small propor- tion of infrequently-used caribou habitat and are tem~ porary facilities.Borrow areas A,D,and F are more likely to be frequented by caribou than are the other potent i a1 borrow areas.Most use of these areas is attributable to summer use by bulls,and it is unlikely that the cow/calf segment of the Nelchinaherd wi 11 come close to the borrow areas during annual movements. Although bull caribou appear to be less sensitive to human act i vi ty and di sturbance than other portions of the herd,they may still avoid the areas during active mining to a limited extent.As a result,the borrow areas will represent an inconsequential loss of summer bull habitat. Cari bou may avoi d the construct i on camps and permanent villages,but again these areas remove a relatively small area of infrequently-used habitat.Ai rcraft traffi c wi 11 increase considerably in the upper basin as a result of the proj ect.The degree of response of cari bou to air- craft disturbance depends on many factors including aircraft type,altitude and horizontal distance from the animals,season,group size and composition,previous activity,herd experience and habitat type.There is some evidence that aircraft disturbance could result E-3-295 directly in the death of young animals (DeVos 1960, Miller and Broughton 1973);however,no unequivocal evidence of this for wild animals is available,and except for intentional harassment of animals by aircraft or low-.altitude flights causing groups of animals to stampede,the main concern of aircraft harassment is related to its energetic effects.Caribou and other large mammals often react to a low-flying aircraft by running~The energetic cost of running in caribou can be 8 to 20 times the basal metabolism (Geist 1975),and there is some evidence that the energy costs to animals that show no overt response at all to di sturbance are nevertheless increased (e.g.,MacArthur et a1.1979). Most studies have found that fixed-wing aircraft are less disturbing than helicopters,other factors being equal (Klein 1974,McCourt et al.1974.Surrendi and DeBock 1976,Fischer et a1.1977,Miller and Gunn 1979)although horizontal and vertical (altitude)distance have not always been distinguished.Shank (1979)generalized results of all these studies and suggested that response levels decreased rapidly with increasing distance from the aircraft up to distances of about 80 m.Beyond 80 m, response levels decreased more slowly and there was great variability in the level of response at particu1aralti- tudes.The results of both Fi scher et al.(1977)and Mi 11 er and Gunn (1979)suggest th at respon se 1eve 1s decrease with increasing horizontal distance in a much more regul ar manner than the decrease in response with decreasing vertical distance. From the vari ous studi es that have been conducted on large mammals,and by extrapolating from the domestic reindeer literature (Zhigunov 1968,Klein 1971),it is evident that very high levels of disturbance from low- flying aircraft could effect the productivity of cari- bou;however,if pilots maintain an altitude of at least 300 m agl whenever possible (600 m agl over the calving grounds during April-July),there is little evidence to suggest that caribou would be seriously effected by air- craft associ ated with project construction and opera- tion. -Filling and Operation Information collected on the movements of the Ne1china caribou herd since 1947 indicate that the proposed Watana .impoundment would intersect a major caribou migration route.This has led to concerns that the impoundment and other project facilities might serve as barriers to cari- bou movements,cause a decrease in use of portions of the range,increase the mortality rate,and tend to isolate one or more subherds having separate calving grounds. E-3-296 -. i" I However,large movements of caribou across either of the proposed impoundments areas have occurred only once since 1973 (Skoog 1968,Pitcher 1982).Hemming (1971)reported that as the herd increased in size between 1947 and 1962, shifts in range use and seasonal splitting both increased infrequency and the herd expanded its range.Con- versely,as numbers decreased after 1962,the area occupi ed by the herd contracted toward the tradi t i anal calving area in the Talkeetna Mountains. It thus appears that there is a close relationship be- tween herd size and the potenti al for adverse impacts due to the Susitna hydroelectric project.If the herd were allowed to increase to 40,000 or more caribou,we would again expect large movements of caribou across the Watana impoundment and Denali to Watana access road.However, major movements across these facilities are not expected 'under the current Nelchina caribou management plan (AOF&G 1976),which includes a management guideline to harvest the annual increment after the herd reaches 20,000 adult caribou.This discussion assumes that herd numbers will remai n near 20,000 duri ng the 1i cense peri od in concor- dance with the State's herd management plan.It must be recognized,however,that a reassessment of the potenti al impacts of the Susitna hydroelectric project on the herd may be necessary if a management plan calling for a much' larger herd size is adopted in the future. The area to be flooded by both the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon impoundments represents much less than one percent of the Nelchina herd's range (Pitcher 1982).Skoog (1968)considered the upper Susitna bottomland to be low quality grazing habitat,but noted its importance to migrating animals at several times of the year.The loss of caribou habitat as a result of inundation will there- fore not be of major consequence to the herd,and by itself should not cause any change in herd size,produc- tivity,or distribution patterns. The Devil Canyon impoundment would occur in an area which has received little caribou use and would probably be of minor significance to the Nelchina caribou herd (Pitcher 1982).In contrast,the potential for the Watana reser- voir to interfere with the migration of caribou between portions of the herd1s range and increase mortality dur:.. i ng mi grat ion as a result of hazards created by the impoundment,is of much greater concern .Although the 1arge movements of caribou recorded in the past across the proposed Watana impoundment area have not occurred in recent years,the area is still used by many caribou as a travel route.Nine crossings of the proposed impoundment by six radio-collared caribou were documented during studies in 1980 and 1981,and other caribou apparently walked along the river ice between the Tyone and Oshetna Ri vers area to Kosi na Creek and Watana Lake,where they then moved into the Talkeetna Mountain foothills. E-3-297 Crossings of the impoundment in 1980 and 1981 occurred mostly between Apri 1 10 and May 31,and between August 1 and September 30 (Pitcher 1982).About 10%of the main herd crossed the ri ver duri ng October 1982 (Pitcher, pers.comm.). The annual drawdown of the reservoir in winter will re- sult in the impoundment being at its lowest level at the time of the spring migration,in late April and early May.At this low point,the impoundment will average approximately 29 m (95 ft)lower than when it is full in October.The gradual winter drawdown will result in the format ion of ice blocks grounded on the shore.Where the slopes of the shore1i ne are gradua 1,such as along the Watana Creek drainage,the blocks will be wide and flat and more easily traversed.Where the banks are steeper, the ice will be fractured into smaller blocks and pile up as ice moves up from below and sl ides down from above; these areas may be more difficul t for caribou to cross. It is possible that some caribou may be killed or seriously injured when crossings. Duri ng the ice-covered reservoir peri od,the prevai 1i ng northeast winds will tend to sweep the reservoir clear of snow or at least will ma.intain a smooth flat surface. Drifting snow is thus expected to accumulate near the southwest end of the reservoir.Since the reservoir will be lowered throughout the winter,it is likely that any large drifts will remain within the reservoir area, a1though there wi 11 undoubtedly be some increased drifting in vegetated areas adjacent to the reservoir as well.This drifting may mask any ice shelving effects along the south bank of the reservoir near the dam,but the resulting deep snows may act as a physical barrier to caribou movements in this area if they are not wind packed. Logs and other debri sin the impoundment may present an additional hazard to caribou crossing.Williston Lake, formed by the W.A.C.Bennett Dam in northern British Columbia,presently has debris rafts covering several square miles,and the combination of logs,wide mud flats and ice shelves presents a formidable obstacle to animal crossing the reservoir.On one occasion a group of 5 caribou crossing the reservoir in mid-July got caught in some logs and all of the animals drowned (R.Bonar,pers. comm.).A program of log removal has been implemented at that project.Similar problems with debris rafts can be expected to occur on the Watana Reservoir.It is pre- dicted that ice blocks will not melt until late June (Bredthauer and Drage 1982:5-7).Cari bou may traverse more easily through standard ice than exposed mud fl ats. E-3-298 - -- - - (iii) It is not clear how caribou will respond to the changed environment which the impoundment will create.The severity of the obstacle caused by the shore ice condi- tions,mud flats,and log debris will vary depending on the stage of breakup and the poi nt at whi ch the cari bou reach the impoundment.Although it is not possible to predict exactly how caribou will respond to the Watana impoundment,the possible reactions of the Nelchina herd to the impoundment have been placed in the following order based on responses of caribou to rivers and lakes in other areas (starting with the most likely reaction and proceeding to the least likely reaction;Banfield, pers.comm.;Roseneau,pers.comm.): •The caribou will manage to cross the impoundment safely in the Watana and Kosina creek areas. The caribou will travel eastward and cross the Susitna Ri ver in the'vi ci ni ty of the Oshetna and Tyone ri vers on ice-covered flats. The cari bou wi 11 make hazardous cross i ngs wi th i n- creased mortality . .The cari bou wi 11 refuse to cross the impoundment and reverse direction. The Watana impoundment should not cause any substantial caribou mortality during the summer and fall open-water period,but it may greatly influence the movements of some caribou during that time.Caribou are excellent swimmers,but large lakes and swift rivers can change the direction or tim'ing of movements.Skoog (1968)reported that "even though caribou are excellent swimmers and gen- erally take readily to the water,frequently I have noted how a movement wi 11 change di rect i on upon encounteri ng a large lake or river and will parallel the waterway rather than cross it."Banfield and Jakimchuk (1980 in Pitcher 1982)state that "car ibou prefer to avoi d open water,II and that large lakes are often crossed at narrow points or where islands provide interim stopping points.It thus seems likely that caribou approaching the reservoir in the Watana Creek vicinity,for example,might parallel the shore to an area where the impoundment is narrower. Dall Sheep -Construction The three Dall sheep populations identified in the Susitna basin are most likely to be affected by the proj- ect through disturbance (i.e.,aircraft traffic,con- struct i on noi se,presence of workers),increased access by hunters,and habitat loss.Each of the populations wi 11 be affected to a di fferent degree as a result of their distribution in relation to project facilities. E-3-299 The Mount Watana population does not occur near the impoundments,access roads,or borr ow areas at any time of the year,and is likely to be affected only be low- flyi ng aircraft crossi ng between the Susitna and Talkeetna river drainages.Disturbance from low-flying aircraft is also of concern with the Portage-Tsusena Creek population;however,an additional consideration to be discussed is the close proximity of borrow area C on upper Tsusena Creek.The ~~atana Hill s popul at i on wi 11 be most affected by the project due to the partial inunda- tion of a major mineral lick on Ja;y Creek used by this population.As will be discussed,the frequent disturb- ance cif sheep at the lick by project personnel and recre- ationists is expected to have a greater affect on the sheep than will the partial inundation of the lick. The impact of intensified human activity on Dall sheep populations is not completely understood,but some gen- eral predictions can be made.If an animal is exces- sively aroused,as from human disturbance,the added cost of excitement or activity may interfere with health, growth,and reproductive fitness (Geist 1975).Ewes with lambs are parti cul arly sensit i ve to disturbances (Smith 1954,Jones et a 1)•Recent studies of free-rangi ng ungulates have found that the heart rate of an individual is a sensitive indicator of arousal,the first stage of an alarm reaction to stress (Ward et al.1976,MacArthur et al.1979,1982).These and other investigators have demonstrated consistent heart rate responses to disturb- ing visual or auditory stimuli,often in the absence of overt behavioral reactions.MacArthur et al.(1982) reported on the heart rate response of an unhunted popu- lation of mountain sheep (Ovis canadensis)to aircraft and vehicle traffic.No heart rate responses were associated with helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft at di stances exceedi ng 400 m from sheep.They found that direct overflights at 90-250 m by helicopters caused sheep to run for 2-15 seconds and el icited a 2-3.5 x increase in heart rate.In Alaska,six studies have included observations on the response of Dall sheep to aircraft disturbances (Andersen 1971;Linderman 1972; Nichols 1972;Price 1972;Lenarz 1974;Summerfield 1974), although only one of these (Lenarz 1974)presented quan- titative data.Helicopters usually evoked a greater response from sheep than di d fi xed-wi ng aircraft.Thi s is possibly because helicopters fly slower and closer to the sheep and are generally more noisy (especially "rotor popping ll )(Andersen 1971;Linderman 1972;Price 1972). No studies have been conducted to determine the responses of mountain sheep to aircraft flying at different alti- tudes,as have been conducted with caribou and muskoxen. The reaction of Dall sheep to low-flying aircraft is E-3-300 ,- - highly vari able (Linderman 1972;Price 1972),although Linderman found that sheep always reacted nervous 1y and assumed the alarm posture (Geist 1971b)until the distur- bance had passed.Lenarz (1974)found that lI ewes ll (including young rams not discernible from females) reacted more strongly to helicopters than did rams. Andersen (1971)andPri ce(1972)found that sheep were more easi ly di sturbed by aircraft when congregated at mineral licks,which are usually located lower on slopes away from escape cover. The extraction of borrow materials from a possible site (area C)on upper Tsusena Creek could affect the distri- bution of the Portage-Tsusena Greek sheep population. The dIstance between the potential borrow site and sea- sonal ranges used by Dall sheep has not been clearly defined yet,but sheep may avoid areas immediately adja- cent to the borrow site during construction.Lent and Summerfield'(1973)reported that dynamite blasts 5.6 km away caused Oa1l sheep to interrupt theIr activities briefly,but that the intensity of their reactions tended to decrease somewhat with subsequent detonations.How- ever~the situation on upper Tsusena Creek may be similar to that at the Usibel1i coal mine near Healy,Alaska, where Dall sheep winter range is immediately adjacent to the mine.Referring to this situation,Heimer (1980) stated: IIDisp1acement was probably never a serious problem here for two reasons:First,Dal1 sheep are so loyal to their traditional ranges that it takes an intense,prolonged disturbance to displace them from an area of traditional use.Second,the area of actual mining activity was on the edge of historic winter range.Sheep were absent during the summer when the most intense disruptive activity occurred.Only occasionally did they use the actual area where coal was being mined during winter.1I The Watana Hi lls Sheep population will be most affected by the project due to the location of a major mineral 1i ck on Jay Creek.The area used by sheep is a steep bluff extending from the creek bottom at 610 m to the rim at 747 m.A ridge on the east side of the creek (692 m elevation)is also used.Approximately 42%of the lick surface area will be inundated each year when the Watana impoundment is at its maximum level (668 m).However, during the months of maximum lick use (May and June),the reservoir level wi 11 be approximately 635 m (1 May)and 638 m (1 June),and thus on 1y about 20%of the 1i ck wi 11 E-3-301 be under water.Most licks are created and/or maintained by water action along creeks or lakes,and it is unlikely that sheep will di sconti nue use of the 1i ck because of partial inundation.Any erosion caused by the reservoir wi 11 as likely enhance the lick as degrade it.In addi- tion,it would be quite feasible to enlarge the lick using explosives if the loss of part of the mineral area h ad an effect on sheep use of the 1i ck.Of greater con- sequence than the decrease in surface area of the lick is the disturbance of sheep using the lick.Frequent visits to the lick (mostly with helicopters)by researchers, other project personnel,and visitors touring the project area has undoubtedly affected the sheep using the lick. The lick is far removed from adequate escape habitat,and these frequent helicopter trips into Jay Creek for pur- poses of viewing the lick could result in its abandonment if continued.Recreationists accessing the area by boat after the impoundment has filled could have a similar effect. The consequences to the Wat ana Hi 11 s sheep popu 1 at ion if the Jay Creek lick is abandoned for any reason are un- clear.Several other mineral licks have been identified within the range of this population,but because sheep have a demonstrated high fidelity to specific licks,it is uncertain whether these alternative licks would re- place Jay Creek.Many researchers have conducted chemi- cal analyses of mineral lick soils in an attempt to explain why sheep visit licks,but the results have been conflicting or inconclusive.Contamination of samples from urine,feces,and/or muddy water have been cited as potential sources of error in these analysis.Many studies have found that sodium is relatively abundant in lick soils and is selectively sought by ungulates (see Stockstad et al.1953 and Tankersley 1981).Plants other than halophytic species absorb only a small percentage of the sodium present in the soil,and it is therefore pos- sible that forage species are unable to supply the quan- tity of sodium needed by big game (Stockstad et al. 1953).Heimer (1973)found that soi 1 samples from high use sites within a mineral lick contained large quan- tities of clay minerals called zeolites which contain biologically-available cations of sodium,potassium, calcium and magnesium. -Filling and Operation Potential impacts of the Watana development on Dall sheep duri ng th is peri od wi 11 be simi 1 ar to those during con- struction (see Section 4.3 (a),(5)),except that the borrow areas wi 11 not be in use,the 1 eve 1 of human activity in the area will be much lower,and partial E-3-302 "... r-, inundation of the Jay Creek mi nera 1 1i ck wi 11 occur near the end of the filling period.Disturbance from aircraft is likely to remain as the most serious impact on the sheep population,·particularly if frequent helicopter trips to view the Jay Creek lick are made. (i v)Brown Bear -Construction The construction of the Watana dam could affect brown bears in several ways.The most serious impact will probably be direct mortality of bears resulting from bear/human conflicts at camps,construction sites,and bear concentration areas,and from increased levels of hunting.Movements to and use of seasonally-important foraging habitats may also be interrupted by project activities,but in the duration of the construction period this impact is not likely to affect bear popula- tion size and productivity. Brown bears have one of the lowest reproductive rates of any land mammal in North America (Bunnel and Tait 1978). This,coupled with the low densities of brown bears in most parts of thei r range,makes them vulnerable to sus- tained high levels of mortality (Craighead et a1.1974). Typically,causes of direct bear mortalities during con- struction of projects in their range include killings in 'defense of life and property',control kills of nuisance animals by appointed agency or project personnel (Cole 1971),acc i dent a1 deaths of bears duri ng attempts to frighten or trap and transplant animals,and increased hunting and poaching pressure resulting from improved access and higher numbers of people (Nagy and Russell 1978,Rogers et a1.1976,JFWAT f'i 1es).Accidental deaths of bears from blasting or destruction of dens also occur but are less common (JFWAT files). Human activities related to the Trans-Alaska pipeline project (TAPS)resulted ina minimum of 11 brown bear and 30 black bear deaths (JFWAT files).One of the most serious problems encountered during TAPS construction re- resulted from the attraction of bears to areas of human activity.Bears quickly discover and utilize improperly handled food and garbage at camps,worksites or dumps (Barnes and Bray 1967,Craighead and Craighead 1972a, Meagher and Phillips 1980).The effects of bears concen- trating at artificial food sources such as dumps are not clearly understood,but there is some evidence that higher cub mortality from predation by adults,and higher di sease and parasite loads may result when bears are concentrated (Cole 1971).Brown bears from hunted E-3-303 populations such as that in the Susitna basin are less 1ike ly to be attracted to camps and dumps than are those in unhunted populations,but some brown bears can still be expected to frequent these areas. Human activity in bear habitat poses problems for people and thus for bears.Fatal attacks by bears occasionally occur when art i fi ci a 1 food sources attract habi tuated bears to sites of human activity (Craighead and Craighead 1972a,Hamer 1974,Herrero 1976).Femal es with cubs, very a ld bears,and habi tuated bears pose the most seri ous threats·(McArthur 1969).Besi des seri ous maul- i ngs,mi nor i njuri es such as bi tes and scratches fre- quently result from attempts to feed bears (Eager and Pe lton 1980).Extremely seri ous bear/human confl i cts occurred during the TAPS project (JFWAT files). There are several specific areas and seasons where human/ bear conflicts might occur.Areas where bears congregate to feed on salmon in late summer are likely to be attrac- tive to project personnel as fishing sites.Brown bears tend to concentrate near the river to feed on vegetation during early spring,soon after emerging from dens;thus, bear/human encounters near the construction site and bor- row areas may be frequent at that time.The proposed camp is likely to be frequented by bears if proper food storage and disposal methods are not implemented.Also, the camp is located in prime berry habitat used by bears in late summer and early fall.The ongoing bear studies will provide the information needed to further identify such bear concentration areas. Several food sources have been identified which appear to be seasonally important to brown bears in the Susitna basin.These include spawning salmon in July and August at Prairie Creek,early spring herbaceous growth and overwintering berries along the lower slopes near the river bottom,widely-scattered berry patches on the benches above the river,and vegetation along tributaries such as Deadman Creek.Some bears may avoid areas of intensive human activity,thus affecting their movements between these wi de ly-scattered food sources.However, because brown bears range widely and frequent openhabi- tats,it is unlikely that the intensive human activities near the damsite and borrow areas,or the presence of a cleared impoundment area,would prevent bears from reach- ing food sources outside of the intensively-used con- struction area. The greatest impact on food sources during the construct- ion period will occur near the dam site,where facilities E-3-304 - - - ..... - and human act ivities .wi 11 be concentrated.The avai 1- abi 1ity of early spri ng foods to brown bears wi 11 be reduced both as a result of direct habitat removal near the construction sites,and by a lterat ions of bear move- ments along the ri ver.It is thought that the ri pari an areas·are most i-mportant to bears in early spri ng,just after they emerge from dens.Snowmelt occurs sooner in these areas (particularly on south-facing slopes),making overwintering berries and green growth available to bears when they have low energy reserves.Moose calving is also concentrated in riparian areas,and brown bears have been shown to be effect j ve predators of both adu 1t and young moose (Ballard et ale 1980). It is unlikely,however,that the loss of early spring feeding areas near the construction site wi 11 affect the popul at ion si ze or product i vity of brown bears.Brown bears eat sparingly for several weeks after emerging from dens during a transition stage from hibernation to normal activity (Craighead and Mitchell 1982).As food becomes increasingly available,the bears l food consumption increases.Craighead and t4itchell (1982)reported that bears in Ye 11 owstone Park dur i ng April and May continued to uti lize body fat stored the previous fall,and that weight gains were not noticeable until late July and August.Moreover,females with cubs remain at high ele- vations away from the river and affected areas throughout the year (Miller and McAllister 1982).Since lactating females,which have higher energy demands than other bears,seem to prosper without access to the ripari an areas,it seems that the loss of riparian areas near the dam site during the construction period could be toler- ated by other bears. Craighead and Mitchell (l982)also reported that although brown bears feeding primarily on green vegetation in spring failed to gain weight,those securing high-protein food such as carcasses,the young of big game species,or garbage maintained or increased their weight.This suggests that a decrease in ungulate populations would have a much greater affect on bear conditi on in the spring than would a decrease in the availability of green vegetation.If project personnel are not allowed to hunt,the effects of the project on moose during the construction phase are expected to be mostly distribu- tional (as opposed to changes in population size),and few impacts at all on caribou are expected.Thus,it is unlikely that noticeable changes in the number of brown bears as a result of altered spring food availability will occur during the construction period. E-3-305 Human activity near den sites is another potential impact of the project on brown bears.All dens located to date have been at higher elevations away from the proposed impoundment areas,but several dens have been located in the vicinity of the Watana to Denali access road segment. Brown bears in the project area do not appear to reuse existing dens,and the availability of adequate denning areas does not appear to 1i mit the bear popul at i on, abandonment of dens by bears in winter can result from human act iv ity near the den (Cr ai ghead and Cr ai ghead 1972b,c;Harding 1976)or from disturbance caused by helicopters (Reynolds et al.1976).Frozen ground would then prevent the bears from digging new dens. Bears are reported as one of the more sens it i ve 1arge mammal s to ai rcraft disturbance (K 1ei n 1974,McCourt et a 1.1974).The react ions of bears to ai rcraft have been recorded in several studies (Quimby 1974;Ruttan 1974c; Harding 1976);there is much individual variation in their reactions,probably related in part to previous experi ence (Linderman 1974,Pearson 1975,Hardi ng and Nagy 1977).Bears seem to react more strong ly to he li- copters than to fi xed-wing aircraft (Quimby 1974,Hardi ng and Nagy 1977).Low-flying aircraft near feeding sites could affect the productivity of brown bears if distur- bance is frequent enough. The impacts of the project on brown bears downstream of the Watana dam will be limited mostly to aircraft distur- bance and increased hunting.No measurable changes in the number of moose or other important prey speci es are expected,although there may be some noticeable shifts in the distribution of prey species away from the construc- tion sites.Fish and mammal populations downstream of the Devi 1 Canyon site would be affected primari ly by increased fishing and hunting pressure,and no impact on brown bears should result given the current hunting and fi shi ng regul ations and the low densit i es of brown bears in the area. -Filling The impacts of the project on brown bears during the filling period are expected to be similar to those during construction,but should be less severe once construction has ended and the intensity of human activity in the basin decreases.If portions of the impoundment are cleared duri ngthi s phase,there may be some di stri bu- tional shifts in the home ranges of both brown bears and important prey species,and a few bear mortalities could result from bear/human conflicts.Flooding of the reser- voir will displace bears from spring feeding areas, E-3-306 - - ..... .- and the expected movements of some individual moose to higher elevations will affect prey availability.It is unlikely that noticeable effects on the brown bear popu- lation will occur during the filling period as a result of these changes in food suppliesr There is some potent- ial for increased cub mortality if adult males are dis- placed to higher elevations where females and cubs occur~ since cubs are sometimes killed by male bears.Possible effects of the reservoi r and changes in downstream flow will be discussed in the operation section. -Operation As described above~the mostseri ous impacts to brown bears during the construction period will probably relate to direct human-caused mortality.Although direct mor- tality~particularly from increased hunting pressure~ wi 11 still occur during the operation and maintenance period of the project,the effects of habitat loss and lower moose numbers will likely have a greater effect on brown bears during this period.There is also some potential for the impoundment to interfere with bear movements in the spring . Hunting pressure on brown bears will probably increase in the upper Susitna basin because of the improved access afforded by the reservoir and access road.Also~many of the workers who helped to construct the dam may return to the area to hunt.Th is increased hunt i n9 pressure wi 11 likely result in lower bear densities and a younger age structure in the brown bear population (Miller and McAllister 1982). The impoundment wi 11 affect the brown bear popul at ion primarily through changes in the availability of moose, berries and green vegetation (Figure E.3.W24).Although the loss of early spring feeding areas near the damsite during the construction period is not likely to measur- ably affect the population~the loss resulting from impoundment of the river will probably decrease carrying capacity.Brown bears must bui 1d up large fat reserves during the six-month period that they are out of dens to sustai n them through the wi nter and early spri ng.Over- wintering berries·appear to be a particularly important food source for some bears duri ng the spri ng peri od. Following the 1981 berry crop failure~Miller (pers. comm.)reported that two of the four females expected to have cubs in 1982 did not~suggesting that the poor nutritional condition of females in the fall may have caused a lower productivity the following year.Pelton (1982)reported for black bears that years of poor E-3-307 berry or acorn production can result in delayed first estrus,decreased litter sizes,and increased incidence of barren females.It thus seems that the permanent loss of habitat and early spring foods in the impoundment area will cause a decrease in the carrying capacity of the upper basin for brown bears.Substanti al changes in the number of moose available to bears,in combination with the loss of berries and other vegetation in the impound- ment zone,would cause an even greater reduct ion in the carrying capacity of the basin. The impoundment is not expected to be an obstac 1e to brown bear movements,except possibly during the spring. Brown bears usually emerge from dens in April,and most h ave entered new dens by the end of October.Thus,the reservoi r wi 11 be ice-free duri ng most of the time bears are out of their dens.Brown bears commonly swim large distances in the ocean to offshore islands (e.g.,Miller and Ba 11 ard 1981;Ro seneau,pers.comm.),and t he open water in the reservoir should not physically obstruct crossings.The ice on the reservoir is expected to begin melting in early March,and the reservoir should be ice- free by late May to early June (Bredthauer and Drage 1982:5-7).During April and May,bears attempting to cross the reservoir will be confronted with ice shelves and blocks,wide mudflats,and thin and broken ice condi- tions.There will also be open water conditions near the intake structures and downstream of the dam.It is not known if one or more of these factors mi ght deter bear crossings,but it seems that these spring conditions would be more likely to affect movements than would the open water later in the summer. The primary effect of the project downstream of the dam would result from increased hunting pressure.Few changes in moose populations or other prey species are expected,and important vegetative food sources will still be available to bears.Although some decreases in spawning salmon may occur,it is not clear if the bear popul at i on downstream of the dam would be affected by this change,since many healthy bear populations occur in areas where salmon are not available. (v)Black Bears -Construction The long-term impact of the Watana development on bl ack bears wi 11 be much greater than that for brown bears, since the impoundment and other project facilities will remove a large proportion of acceptable black bear habi- tat in the Watana area.However,habitat loss may not be E-3-308 - -.. - ~ I - the most serious impact on black bears during the first few years of the construction period,when attraction to art ifi ci al food sources,di sturbance of bears at denni ng and feeding sites,and increased levels of hunting are more likely to have serious effects (see.Figure E.3.W25). Black bears in the vicinity of the proposed Watana im- poundment are restricted to a band of conifer forest ad- jacent to the river.Between Watana Creek and the Tyone and Oshetna ri vers area,thi s band of forest becomes increasingly constricted.The construction site,borrow areas,camp,airport,and other facilities will remove a large proportion of the black bear habitat,thus concen- trating the bears into the limited remaining areas. Black bears are more likely to frequent the camp and con- struction sites than are brown bears,and this will cause problems for both people and bears (see 4.3(a),(iv)). De 1i berate feedi ng of bears by project personnel at con- struction sites will intensify the problem. Borrow areas D and F are located in the tablelands and are used by black bears foraging for berries in late sum- mer (Miller and McAllister 1982).Bears will be affected both by the direct removal of this rich food source,and by a:greater likelihood of contact with humans,which could lead to some bear mortalities.The other borrow areas are in forested areas used by black bears through- out the year,and the mining of construction materials from these sites will cause a reduction in the avail- ability of denning sites and feeding areas. Black bears in the Susitna basin typically den at eleva- tions below 3,000 feet,and 9 of the 13 known black bear den sites in the Watana impoundment area will eventually be flooded.Si nce dens are concentrated near the ri ver where human activity will be greatest,there is also the potential for disturbance to cause den abandonment,or to make some denning areas unacceptable.Many of the dens sites were reused by the same or a different bear,which may indicate a scarcity of acceptable sites.Human activity on the ground and low-flying aircraft·can both cause den abandonment.As discussed for brown bear,den abandonment in winter when the ground is frozen may result in a bear's death. Because black bears will be concentrated near the river, and may have increased movements whi 1e searchi ng for food,anyi ncrease in hunting pressure during the con- struction period could have a substantial affect on the population.If black bears do increase their movements away from forested areas,as they do duri ng berry crop failures (Miller and McAlister 1982),there is also a potential for increased mortality due to encounters with brown bears. £-3-309 -Filling and Operation Black bears would be impacted in several ways during the clearing of the impoundment area and initial filling period.The loss of feedi ng areas,disturbance at den sites,and increased contacts with people will all result in severe habitat degredat i onwithi n and adjacent to the impoundment area.Bears occurri ng in the impoundment area will likely increase their movements away from the river,thus increasing contacts with brown bears and. hunters.There is little likelihood of bears being drowned while in their dens during reservoir filling, since wi nter flows into the reservoi r wi 11 be very low, and IllOSt of this flow will be released downstream. After fi 11 i ng,it is unl ikely that a vi abl e res i dent black bear population will exist along much of the im- poundment area.There shoul d be adequate habi tat to sup- port resident populations to the east of the impoundment (near the Tyone River confluence)and also along the western end of the impoundment near and west of the Fog Lakes and Watana Creek.Transi ent bears between these areas are 1 ikely to use the other areas adjacent to the impoundment,and a few bears may resi de there year-round. However,the 1ack of denni ng areas and adequate forest stands near the remaining food supplies will severely limit the resident population.These bears will also be quite susceptible to hunting along the reservoir margin. Other long-term impacts are likely to be similar to those for brown bears (see 4.3(a),(iv)).Black bears,like brown bears,are able to swim long distances,and the open water in the impoundment should not be an absolute barrier to their movements.Some effects on bear move- ments,however,can be expected. Downstream effects of the Watana development on black bears are likely to be much less severe.Impacts on sal-. mon spawning areas,aircraft disturbance,and increased hunting will probably have the greatest effect on the population.The expected successional changes in vegeta- tion are not likely to have a noticeable affect on the population,nor will any open water areas during winter since bears will be in dens at that time.The importance of salmon to downstream bears is unknown,but several bears from the upper basin moved downstream to feed on sal mon duri ng a berry crop failure,and bears are com- monly seen along spawning sloughs in late summer.Twenty percent of the salmon radio-tagged during studies down- stream were eaten by bears (Mill er,pers.comm.).How- ever,bear scats found along salmon streams are comprised mostly of berri es,and thus the importance of salmon to these bears in uncertai n.Bear studi es downstream of E-3-310 ~, .~ - - ~, """ ..... ..... Devil Canyon will bei ntens i fi ed in 1983,and thus the food habits of downstream bears will be better defined at that time. (vi)Wolf Wolves may be affected by construction and operation of the Watana development by some loss of den and rendezvous sites,by disturbance,by increased hunting (see Section 4.3(c)),and indirectly,by loss of food sources. No known dens or rendezvous sites wi 11 be flooded or des- troyed by the present construction zone plans.Some den and rendezvous sites that have not been located may be des- troyed,but because potential sites are relatively abundant in the Susitna basin (Ballard et al.1982c),this would not have a serious effect on wolf populations. Under most circumstances,wolves readi ly habituate to man- made disturbance (e.g.Van Ballenberghe et al.1975,Mi lke 1977).The major exceptions to this are disturbance at den sites in spring.During Susitna baseline studies,human disturbance at three den sites caused early abandonment of all three,the adults moving the pups to new locations.In these cases,the pups were probably a.month old and no pup mortality was noted.Ballard et al.(1982c)speculated that younger pups might be more likely to die if moved from the whelping den prematurely.Abandonment of dens after disturbance has also been noted in other areas of Al aska and in Canada (Carbyn 1974,Chapman 1977). A seri ous impact of increased interact ions between humans and canids (wolves and foxes)is the threat of exposure to rabies.That wolves (and bears and foxes)do habituate to the presence of humans was demonstrated by problems encoun- tered during the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (Milke 1977).Wolves were fed deliberately and were allowed to scavenge on unburned garbage at construction sites and camps.As a result,many animals became severe nuisances and were killed.In addition,instances of workers being bitten and requiring hospitalization and occasionally rabies vaccine occurred. Loss of food sources through development impacts on prey species is another possible impact of the Watana develop- ment on wolves.Wolves in the upper Susitna basin prey primari lyon moose and to a lesser extent on cari bou . Caribou population levels are not likely to be seriously E-3-311 affected by the Watana development,but moose popu 1at ions wi 11 probably be reduced.The extent to which thi s reduc- tion actually affects wolves depends on the extent to which wo lf popu 1at ions are present 1y 1imi ted by food avai 1abi 1i ty or by hunting,tripping,and poaching. Van Ballenberghe et al.(1975)reviewed the available lit- erature on factors controlling wolf populations.They believed that whlle social factors such as territoriality and stress were the ultimate factors controlling population levels,an abundant food source lowered the threshold for action of soci al factors.They suggest that food is the main factor permitting the development of dense wolf popu- lations (Figure E.3.W26). There are no data to indicate wolf population trends in relation to population trends of moose and caribou in the Susitna basin.However,the consistently high harvest on wolves through the 1970's (Section 4.2 (a),(iv))suggests that the low caribou population and declining moose popu- lation in the early 1970·s (Section 4.2(a),(i and ii))did not cause a substantial reduction in wolf numbers. It is more likely that wolf population levels are con- trolled by exploitation rates.Close to half the upper basin wolf population is removed each year by hunting (Section 4.2(a),(vi)).In the likely event that this situation continues,the red,uction in the moose population, as a result of the project,should hve a lesser effect on the wolf population than will the harvest levels. (vii)Wolverine, The Susitna Hydroe 1ectri c Project wi 11 have both posi t i ve and negative effects on the wolverine population in the upper basin.Wolverines will be most affected by changes in winter food availability,and by higher trapping mortal- ity due to improved access and a larger human population in the area.Other factors such as a localized avoidance of camps and roads,di sturbance from ai rcraft and construction activities,and habitat loss due to the impoundments and other project facilities are not likely to greatly affect the number or productivity of wolverines in the Susitna basin.Loss of den sites is not likely to be a problem since wolverines den in a variety of habitats,generally on the surf ace of the ground under snow.Downstream of Devi 1 Canyon,wolverines are likely to be measurably affected only by any increase in trapping pressure resulting from the project.Each of these factors wi 11 be di scussed in greater detail in the following sections. E-3-312 - - - ~I - - -I The area in northwestern Montana studi ed by Hornocker and Hash (l981)contained a large reservoir 48 km long and up to 6.5 km wide,and thus some data is available on wolve- r i ne movement sand ranges in re 1at 1on to al arge impound .. ment.They reported that "thesi ze and shape of ranges were not affected by rivers,reservoirs,highways or major mountain ranges."Magoun (1982)stated that although topo- graphic features were not physical barriers to wolverine movements,they did appear to influence the shape of home ranges to some extent.Ri vers,ri dges,drai nage di vi des, and we ll-defi ned breaks inhabit at types often coi nci ded with home range boundaries in her study area.Mal e home ranges appeared to be 1ess affected by topographi cal fea- tures than did femal e ranges.Some home range boundari es in the upper Susitna basin coincide with topographical features (see Figure E.3.W15),but no clear relationship between the major features and most home range boundari es is evident.It is possible that the Watana impoundment might serve to separate home ranges once it is in opera- tion. Based on the estimate of about one wo lverine per 163 km 2 derived in Section 4.2(a},(vii),the direct loss of over 206 km 2 due to the impoundments,access roads,camps,and other project features would potenti ally affect only two wo 1verines.However,the affected areas are of increased importance to many wolverines in the upper basin because winter food supplies are usually greater at the lower ele- vations most affected by the project facilities.Changes in the availability of winter food may affect wolverine movements,densites,and prOductivity,and therefore it is important to consider these changes in some detai 1. In the area downstream of the Watana dam,changes in the avail abil ity of wi nter prey are not expected to be great enough to appreciably affect the wolverines in that area. The Devil Canyon impoundment is contained within a steep canyon supporting relatively low densities of ungulates and small mammals,and the access road will pass mostly through tundra habitats.Only a small proportion of the forested habitats will be removed by the project;small mammal and grouse populations should not be greatly reduced.Also, the cleared transmi ssi on corri dors wi 11 enhance moose and small mammal popul ati ons,therefore,compensati ng somewhat for losses caused by the Devil Canyon impoundment.Few caribou use this area,and any mortality of moose or cari- bou resulting from hazards such as ice or open water areas, or from increased predation by wolves and bears,would likely benefit the wolverines in that area. E-3-313 The Watana impoundment·wi 11 have a much greater affect on winter food availability.Because a relatively high pro- portion of the forested area will be inundated,there will be a substantial decrease in the availability of small mam- mals and grouse used by a few wolverines during winter. The size of the moose population in the vicinity of the Watana impoundment will decrease during the license period, but there may be an increase in the number of ungulate car- casses available to wolverine.Some mortal ity of both moose and caribou is expected from floating debris,thin ice conditions,and large mud flats in the drawdown zone, and predation by wolves and brown bears may increase along the shores of the impoundment.Higher winter mortality of moose near the impoundment is also expected during winters of moderate to deep snow.It is not clear if the more rapid turnover of the moose population in the upper basin will offset the lower density of moose and small mammals, The effects of improved access from the roads and impound- ment on wolverine,including increased trapping mortality and human presence,is discussed in Section 4.3(c),(vii). (viii)Be1ukha Whale The majority of the Cook Inlet population of belukha whales appears to concentrate near the mouth of the Susitna River during the calving period.Studies were undertaken in 1982 to address the concerns that project-related changesi n water temperatures or anadramous fish runs at this critical period might interfere with calving success.For example, Seargent (1973)attributed the elimination of calving by belukhas in the St.Lawrence River to hydroelectric development on the Manicougan and Outardes Rivers,and sub- sequent alterations in water tempertures. The Susitna project will have no measurable effect on the belukha whale population.Post-project water temperatures, sal i niti es,and fi sh abundance wi 11 not be much di fferent than pre-project conditions during the months that belukhas concentrate at the ri ver mouth.No changes at all in anadramous fish runs during l"1ay and June are expected (see Section 2),and it is doubtful that fish from the Susitna River comprise more than a small percentage of the whales' diet when they are away from the ri ver I s mouth at other times of the year. Although water temperatures released from the dams will be 0-4°C warmer than natural tempertures,the dilution effect of other rivers and temperature exchange of the river with the ai r and ground wi 11 result in no post-project differ- ence in water temperatures at the mouth of the river E-3-314 - - - - - - (ix) during May and June.Only 7,650 cfs of the 55,930 cfs post-project inflow into Cook Inlet in May will be from the Susitna River (both dams operating).In June,only 8,150 of 105,702 cfs wi 11 be contri buted by the Susi tna. Thus,the dilution factor of other water sources,and 151 mi 1es of temperature exchange with the envi ronment,wi 11 result in similar pre-and post-project water temperatures at the mouth of the river during calving. Beaver The beaver population along the Susitna River is likely to increase during the license period as a result of the Watana development.Beneficial effects will occur mostly downstream of the dam as a result of regulated flows. During the construction period,however,beavers occurring within the borrow areas and along the access road could be adversely affected. -Construction Beavers occurring in the vicinity of the construction site,borrow areas,camp,and other project facilities .will be impacted through a loss of habitat,altered water levels along creeks,and from trapping by project person- nel.Reservoir clearing activities would have immediate negat i ve effects on beaver occurri ng withi n the proposed impoundment (e.g.,Wooley 1974).However,Gipson et al. (1982)reported that no active beaver lodges were found along the river within the impoundment zone or on the lower reaches of feeder streams.In contrast,borrow sites for the d am and access road wi 11 remove habi t at for approximately 50 beavers.This includes about forty of the 65 beaver occurring along Deadman Creek in the lower reach designated as road material sites,and about 10 beaver i 11 Borrow Area C on upper Tsusena Creek.No active beaver colonies were found in the other Watana borrow si tes duri n9 an 11 October 1982 aeri al cache survey.The alignment of roads to these borrow areas has not yet been desi gnated,and therefore the number of beaver affected by the borrow site activities is sti 11 unknown. -Filling and Operation The impoundment area current 1y support s few beavers,and therefore the flooding of this area wi 11 not have any substantial effect on this furbearer species.The reser- voir will be of little value to beavers after filling because of the annual drawdown.A few beavers,however, may persi sti n using the reservoir area.Each year for the past 12 years,beavers have attempted to bui ld lodges E-3-315 and food caches on Williston Lake 1n British Columbia, which has an annual drawdown of about 17 m (R.Bonar, pers.comm.).One innovative colony there has built its lodge on a raft of floating logs,which moves up and down with the water level,whereas another colony has a series of burrows extending down to the minimum drawdown level. During filling,the river is to be passed directly through the dam during the winter months,and thus the only effect of the dam on downstream flows wi 11 be during summer.Dud ng the operat i on phase,downstream flows will be higher than present in the w1nter,but lower in summer. Few beavers currently occur in the river reach between Watana and Devi 1 Canyon,and the estimated 70 beaver be- tween Devil Canyon and Ta lke'etna were found most ly in side channels,sloughs,and clearwater areas (Section 4.2(b),(0).Although swift currents in the main chan- nel probably contribute to these low densities,the greatly-fluctuating water levels,ice scouring events, and low abundance of early successional vegetation are p~obably the major limiting factors (Figure E.3.W27). Another limiting factor is the depth of water beneath the ice in wi nter.Beavers requi re at 1east 1 m of open water under the ice for access to food caches and lodge entrances (Scott 1940,Hakala 1952).Since winter water depths are now much less than those in summer,the winter flows determi ne whi ch areas are sui tab 1e for year-round occupation by beaver. Any site currently occupied by beaver should still be available post-project,since winter flows will be higher than at present.In addition,many areas now subject to freeze-out will also be available for colonization by beaver.The increased availability of early-successional vegetation,reduced ice-scouring,lack of an ice cover in the Watana -Dev;1 Canyon reach,more stable year-round flows,and lack of floods which destroy food caches and other beaver structures,wi 11 all result in improved downstream habitat for beaver.Beaver habitat south of Talkeetna may also be enhanced as a result of the in- creased occurrance of favored food plants,but the more unstable water levels resulting from increased contribu- tions from other rivers and tributaries will dampen this effect.A planned flow increase in 1ate summer for fisheries mitigation purposes will likely have little impact upon beaver,as the flow will have returned to a stabilized level before lodge preparations and food cache construction have begun in earnest for the winter. E-3-316 - - -, - - If construction camp personnel and their families are a 11 owed to trap in the area,beaver popul at ions wi 11 be affected both along the Susitna Ri ver itself and in the lakes and creeks on either side of the river.It is not known at present how many beaver occupy these habitats, nor how strong trapping pressure would be,given the current depressed price for beaver pelts. (x)Muskrat Muskrats will be affected primarily as a result of improved access for trappers.Some habitat 10sswHhin the borrow areas andi mpoundment zone will also occur;however,musk- rats may benefit from additional beaver ponds downstream of the project (Section 3.3(a),(ix)).With the exception of trappi ng mortality,the net impact on the muskrat popu- lation should be minor. Of the 103 1akes surveyed for muskrat si gn in spri ng 1980, 29 occurred with in the borrow areas or impoundment zone of the Watana project (Table E.3.W73);only 10 of these lakes had muskrat pushups.A total of 29 pushups were observed on these lakes,but the number of muskrats this represents is unknown.Pushups are temporary structures,and one muskrat can create many of these during a winter.A likely estimate of the number of muskrat to be lost as a result of this habitat loss is 10 to 20 animals.Improveddownstream habitat will probably compensate for this loss. Muskrats are extremely susceptible to water level fluctua- tions (Bellrose and Brown 1941),and usually find braided rivers poor habitat due to lack of forage and burrow sites (BroOks and Dodge 1981).As such,there is 1itt 1e poten- t i a 1 muskrat habitat in the act i ve flood pl ai n downstream of the Watana damsite.Many muskrat probably occupy beaver colony sites (Curatolo et al.1981)along the Susitna River which are outside of the active floodplain.Below Montana" Creek good muskrat habitat occurs in old channels now func- tioning as cle"arwater seeps which will not be affected by the project (Bredthauer and Drage 1982). If construction camp personnel and their families are allowed to trap in the area,muskrat populations throughout the lakes lying on either side of the Susitna River could be highly affected.Gipson et al.(1982)found muskrat sign in these lakes and noted their vulnerability to trap- ping. (xi)Mink and Otter -Upstream Effects Because mink and otter are moderately abundant in the Upper Susitna Basin and are probably dependent on aquatic E-3-317 and semi-aquatic habitats along the Susitna River and its tributaries,construction and operation of the Watana dam may have substantial impacts on these species.The most important effects include loss of habitat,reduction of food supplies,increased disturbance,and barriers to movement. Clearing and flooding of the impoundment will eliminate a substantial proportion of good quality otter and mink habitat.High quality habitats for these semi-aquatic furbearers is generally characterized by moderate to slow flowing streams and rivers with well wooded banks.Ponds· with abundant food,deep and stable water condit ions,and an i rregu 1ar shore 1i ne a1so appear to be good h ab it at s (Hodgdon and Hunt 1953;Knudsen 1962;Barber et al. 1975).Because the impoundment will result in a large drawdown zone,it is unlikely that the reservoir will be heavily-utilized by mink or otter.Small 'declines in water levels (e.g.less than 1 m)may acutally benefit mink during the winter by creating air spaces under the ice that would allow them to hunt more easi ly (Erri ngton 1943;Harbo 1958).However,the 1arge drawdown area of the Watana dam would probably be detrimental to otter and mink;it would isolate their bank dens from the reservoir during the winter and would probably reduce prey avai labi lity. The extent to which otter and mink habitat wi 11 be re- duced and the effects on local popul ations are dHficult to assess.The impoundment will flood approximately 65 m of the mainstream Susitna River.In addition,portions of a number of tributaries will be inundated by the im- poundment;these include Deadman Creek (3.7 stream km wi 11 be inundated at maximum fi 11),Kosi na Creek (6.4 km),Jay Creek (5 km),Goose Creek (2.4 km),and the Oshetna Ri ver (3.2 km).Most of Tsusena Creek wi 11 be disturbed by gravel removal.It is not known what these losses represent in terms of a proportionate reduction of available mink and otter habitat.However,because almost all otter and mink tracks were observed along the Susitna River (Table Furbearer-l),inundation will likely reduce the amount of good habitat substantially. Clearing and flooding of the impoundment area will reduce prey availability for otter and mink.Clearing of forest cover would reduce the availability of some prey of mink such as small mammals and waterfowl.Effects of erosion and consequent si ltation,as well as effects of dust that are associated with clearing may also reduce the avail- ability of fish and crustaceans.Flooding of the reser- voir wi 11 probably result in further reductions in prey availability;crustacean distributions and productivity E-3-318 - - .... - - ~- - - - ..... .- - - - will probably be altered by the drawdown zone,and the speci es composition,abundance,and di stri but i on of fi sh will change.In addition,because the reservoir will greatly expand the amount of aquatic habitat,fish will be less concentrated than they are at present and more difficult for otters and mink to capture.The net result of these changes,in addition to the change of shoreline habitats,will be an avoidance of reservoirs by mink and otter.The effects on productivity associ atedwith these dietary changes are unknown. Cl eari ng of the reservol r si te and construct i on act i v- ities,particularly in close proximity to streams and rivers,may disturb mink and otter and may result in in- terference with daily activities or,in extreme cases,an avoi dance of the area.Densities of the European otter (Lutra lutra),a species closely related to river otter, along the Ri ver Terre in England appear to be inversely related to the amount of human disturbance (recreational fisherman)and the amount of clearing of woodland cover along the river banks (MacDonald et al.1978).Because recreational use of the upper reaches of streams along the north side of the impoundment will probably increase during construction and operation,and because the upper reaches of these streams may represent a moderate propor- tion of the remaining higher quality habitat for semi- aquat ic furbearers,di sturbance effects on mink and otter could be important. Because mi nk and otter are well-adapted to aquat i.e h ab i- tats,the water body of the impoundment wi 11 not repre- sent a seri ous barri er to movements of these speci es. However,access to the impoundment water body may be in- hibited by the expansive drawdown zone;the large separa- tion between the water body and the onshore vegetation and dens may prevent animal s from crossi ng the impoundment area. -Downstream Effects Alteration of the river hydrology and vegetation communi- ties as a result of the Watana dam have already been dis- cussed (Section 3.3(a)).The effects of these altera- tions on mink and otter are difficult to assess.Reduced water flows in summer may i ni t i all y strand dens of both speci es well above the water 1i ne,may reduce muskr at populations (an important prey species of mink),and may decrease the availability of certain fish species (Section 2.3(a))and crustaceans (important prey species of mink and otter).Mink may be better able to withstand the effect of reduced water flows because of thei r ability to hunt in terrestrial habitats (Marshall 1936; Harbo 1958). E-3-319 The area of permanently open water downstream of the Watana dam may benefit small numbers of mink and otter. Both of these furbearers common 1y concentrate in open water stretches of ri vers and streams in wi nter (Barber et aL 1975). (xii)Red Fox and Coyote Coyotes occur in the Watana development area but they are so uncommon that development activities are unlikely to have a quant i fi ab le effect on them. Coyotes do not appear to avoid areas of human activity; however,no studies have specifically evaluated the effects of human disturbance on this species.Ferris et al.(1978) demonstrated a significant preference of coyotes (based on wi nter track count surveys)for an area wi th i n 200 m of a section of an interstate highway in Maine relative to an area 200-400 m from the highway.Track surveys also indi- cated that coyotes occasionally used the right-of-way as a hunting or travel route.Penner (1976)similarly concluded that coyotes preferred large cleared areas and avoided un- disturbed habitats within an oil sands development area in northwestern Alberta. The major impacts on red foxes would probably result from trapping by construction workers and killing of nuisance animi a1s at camps and constructi on sites.Habitat loss from fl oodi ng of the impoundment woul d not have a great impact on foxes since most individuals apparently utilize areas above the high water line of the impoundment (666 m elevation)and areas to the east of the impoundment on the Lake Louise flats.Fox dens typically occur at elevations of 1000 m to 1200 m and no foxes or fox sign were found along the Susitna River or the lower reaches of its tribu- taries in late winter or spring during baseline studies (Gipson et al.1982).Foxes did occur along the Susitna at other seasons.Presumably,an abundance of prey would be available for foxes during summer and fall and loss of hab- itat along the river would probably have negligible or minor effects. Red fox similarly do not appear to avoid areas of frequent human activity.Observations of red fox and the location of den sites in relation to the main road in Denali Nation- a1 Park,showed that red foxes di d not avoi d areas of fre- quent human use and that in some cases wou 1d habituate to human disturbances (Tracy 1977).Red foxes in Gatineau Park,Quebec,appeared to commonly use areas in the imme- diate vicinity of human disturbance and showed little avoidance of areas frequented by snowmobilers (Neumann and j\1erri am 1972). E-3-320 - ...., - .... - Foxes away from den sites habituate to human activity so readily that they can become a nuisance at construction and camp sites if they are fed or allowed to feed on garbage (Milke 1977).The presence of scavenging foxes frequently leads to workers being bitten and occasionally needing hospitalization for rabies vaccine (Milke 1977).It also often leads to the destruction of the faxes. Although the fox population in the Susitna Basin is small (Section 4.2(b),(vi),it is apparently a source of juve- niles which disperse to adjacent areas (Gipson et ale 1982).An increase take of foxes from currently low level s is expected because of improved access and residency of construct i on personnel and may el imi nate thi s source of dispersing individuals. (xii i)Other Furbearers This group includes species that occur primarily in for- ested habitats--marten,lynx,short-tailed weasel and least weasel.Impacts on marten are di scussed in greatest detail.As mentioned previously (4.2{b),(v))marten have hi stor i cally been and cont i nue to be economi ca lly the most important furbearer in the vi ci nity of the impoundment zones.Lynx are very uncommon in the upper Susitna basin. Weasels are probably.quite common,but there is little specific information on their abundance and distribution in the bas in. All of these speci es wi 11 suffer pr imari ly as a resul t of the loss of forested habitats to the impoundment (see Figure 3.E.3.W28),borrow sites and other projectfacil- ities.Gipson et ale (1982)have estimated the number of marten in the winter population directly impacted by loss of habitat in the Watana and Devil Canyon developments through a model based on the following data and assump- tions: -Adult male marten home ranges are mutually exclusive and adjoi n one another so that all marten habitat in the impounded area is inhabited (trapping likely affects this assumption). -Marten habi tat is·defi ned as forest,and marten are restri cted to thi s habitat type. - A 1:1 sex ratio exists in all age classes of the popu- lation. -65%of the population are juveniles (less than 1 year old)(Archibald pers.commo),and juveniles appear in the harvest in proportion to their number in the population. E-3-321 -The mean home range size of male marten is 682 ha (Gipson eta 1.1982). This model gives an estimated density for all age/sex groups of 0.847 marten per km 2 .Using a figure of 11,798 ha of forest habitat lost to impoundment areas,borrow areas construction site and camps for Watana development, 100 marten (3.4%)would be eliminated from an estimated popoulation in the basin of 2,940. Gipson (pers.comm.)attempted an independent population estimate in July 1982 near Watana Creek using a mark-- recapture technique.An 11 km trapline with trap spacing of 0.4 km on either side of Watana Creek captured no marten in 252 trap nights (the minimum expected catch based on densities of 0.008 marten per ha was 10).This result sug- gests that fewer marten than calculated above may actually exist in the impoundment areas,and that fewer marten would be affected. There are obvious difficulties with the model used for the estimate of 100 marten eliminated.Perhaps the most seri- ous is that marten densities and home ranges vary between different forest types,being most common in dense,mature coniferous forest (deVos 1952,Douglas et al.1976,Koiler and Hornocker 1977).The estimate for prime forest habitat only (eliminating woodland and open forest types)is 26 marten eliminated from a population of 347 (7.5%).The estimate of 100 marten lost is probably high. Clearing of small areas of forest at construction sites and borrow areas and the associ ated human di sturbances may effect marten home range size and distribution.However, these types of changes wi 11 be most extension in areas affected by the access route and transmission line and are discussed in Section 4.3(c)and (d). Lynx are uncommon in the Susitna basin,probably because their major prey,snowshoe hares,have been historically uncommon.Lynx wi 11 probably not be directly affected by habitat loss,and revegetation of disturbed areas improve habitat for snowshoe hare in the basin.Major effects on the few lynx occurri ng in the project area are therefore not expected. Numbers of short-tailed and least weasels may be reduced through habitat loss.Reductions are unlikely to be seri- ous within the basin and regional effects would be minor. Construction activities and human distrubance could result in avoidance of the construction zone by furbearers.No information is available for lynx and weasels.Evidence £-3-322 - ~, - - ..... - - - - (xiv) exi sts that marten are to 1erant of moderate 1eve 1s of di s- turbance in areas adjacent to logging operations (Clark and Cambell 1977,Soutiere 1978,Steventon and Major 1982). Raptors and Raven The construction and operation of the Watana Dam will affect raptors through a number of mechanisms (Table E.3.W74),the most important of which are habitat loss and disturbance.Habitat loss includes the flooding of suit- able nesting cliffs,removal of trees used for nesting and perching,and a loss of hunting areas.Many of the tree and c 1i ff nest s withi n the impoundment area may be aban- do~ed during the construction phase as a result of distur- bance,and several nest sites immedi ately adjacent to the access road or borrow areas may also be abandoned. -Habi tat Loss About 38%of the known raptor and raven cliff-rresting locations and at least 40%of the known raptor tree- nesting locations in the general vicinity of the proposed project wi 11 be lost as a result of the Watana project (Table E.3.W7S and E.3.W76).The raptor species affected include golden eagles,bald eagles,gyrfalcons,goshawks, and ravens. At least 6 (38%)of the 16 total known golden eagle nest- ing locations in the general vcinity of the project area will be directly lost to construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir.Five of those 6 nesting locations will be inundated,whereas one my be lost during material excavation operations at Borrow SlteE (Figure E.3.W29, Tables E.3.W7S and E.3.W76). Cliff-nesting habitat for golden eagles will become severely limited upstream of the Watana Dam site once the impoundment is full (Table E.3.W77).Loss of cliffs up- stream of the Watana Dam site may increase the importance of cliffs farther downstream in Devil Canyon,along Fog Creek,Tsusena Creek and others draining into the Devil Canyon impoundment zone.However,many of the cliff areas in Devil Canyon appear to be exposed to hi gher levels of moisture,and some sections may lack suitable ledges on which golden eagles would construct nests. Golden eagles often have several alternative nesting locations,some perhaps 8 km apart (see Roseneau et ale 1981);however,losses of 38%of the well-established golden eagle nesting locations along the·upper Susitna E-3-323 Ri ver,concommitt ant losses of most of the other poten- tial nesting cliffs upstream of the Watana Dam site,and a suspected scarcity of alternate nesting locations throughout much of the remainder of the upper basin sug- gest that the upper Susitna River basin population of golden eagles will be reduced by 3-5 pairs as a result of the construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir (Roseneau,pers.comm.). As many as 4 (50%)of the eight total known bald eagle nesting locations in the general vicinity of the project area will be directly lost to clearing and filling of the reservoir (see Figure E.3.W29,Tables E.3.W75 and E.3.W76).Three of these locations are 1tree-nests and one is the sole cliff-nesting location known to be used by bald eagles in the Susitna River drainage.Fur- thermore,almost all white spruce and balsam poplar trees of a size suitable to bald eagles that occur in the general vicinity of Watana are located within the impoundment area on tributary deltas and islands.Con- struction and filling of Watana will likely limit bald eagles to one or two available nesting locations upstream of the impoundment,and one or two potential locations along the Lower Oshetna River.This may increase the importance of other potential nesting habitat downstream of the Watana Dam site,including balsam poplar stands along Portage Creek and white spruce and balsam poplar near Stephan Lake and along Prairie Creek.In any event, it appears unlikely that habitat loss as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir will have more than a local effect on the Susitna River bald eagle population,the majority of which inhabits the area downstream of Indian River (see Section 4.2(c),(i)). [IBa1d eagle c1iff-nesting locations are relatively rare throughout Al aska north of the Alaska Peninsula - for instance,in the ent ire Tanana Ri ver drai nage where over 40 nesting locations are known (Roseneau et al. 1981),only one nesting location is on a cliff (D.G. Roseneau,pers.comm.)] No known gyrfalcon nesting locations will be directly lost as a result of the Watana project.However,gyrfal- cons often use nests constructed by other cliff-nesting species,including ravens and golden eagles (e.g.,Cade 1960,White and Cade 1971,Roseneau 1972),and some of the golden eagle and raven nesting locations lost as a result of inundation or gravel mining may represent past or future locations used by gyrfalcons.In southcentral Alaska and the Al aska Range,where nesting densi ties are low (Roseneau 1972,Roseneau et al.1981,Bente 1981), use of other species'nests by gyrfalcons is less E-3-324 - - - - - .".., ,..,. is less prevalent than in more northern and western regions of the state where the majority of the Alaska gyrfalcon population breeds and winters (see Roseneau et al.1981).It is therefore unlikely that habitat loss as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reser- voi r wi 11 have more than mi ni rna 1"effect on the upper Susitna River gyrfalcon population. One (33%)of three known goshawk nesting locations in the general vicinity of the Watana project will be directly lost to clearing and filling of the Watana Reservoir (Figure E.3.W29,Tables E.3.W75 and W.3.W76).The nest location that will be lost is the only one discovered,to date,upstream of the Watana Dam site,beyond which potential nesting habitat becomes very scarce (D.G. Roseneau,pers.obs.). As many as 10 (48%)of 21 previously used raven nesting locations in the general vicinity of the Watana project will be lost as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir (Figure E.3.W29,Tables E.3.W75 and E.3.W76).All will be lost by inundatio.n,and one addi- tional nest may be inundated at times of maximum flood stage (see Figure E.3.W29)or be so close to maximum nperating water level as to be unuseable. Although a considerable number of raven nesting locations and cliff habitat will be lost as a result of Watana Reservoir filling (Table E.3.W77),the consequences of this loss to ravens wi 11 be minor in compari son to those for other cliff-nesting species (particularly golden eagles).Ravens commonly nest in a wide variety of situat ions inA1 aska,inc 1udi ng man-made structures (see Roseneau et al.1981).Tree-nesting is common,·and ravens consistently nest on small cliffs that are unsuit- able for raptors (Roseneau pers.comm.).Construction and fi 1 ling of Watana without development of Devi 1 Canyon is more likely to result in increased use of cliffs along Devi 1 Canyon and trees downstream of the Watana Dam site along the ri ver and tri butari es,than reduce the upper Susitna River basin raven population. In addition to loss of nesting habitat,it is anticipated that some loss of perching and hunting habitat for rap- tors will also occur as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir.Perching habitat will primarily be lost as a result of inundation of cliffs (see Table E.3.W77),and the clearing of trees prior to reservoir inundation.Loss of hunting habitat is more difficult to determine.No data was collected in the Upper Susi tna Ri ver Basi n to determi ne raptor hunting E-3-325 ranges andforagi ng areas;however,the general degree of imp act for at 1east three speci es may be inferred from other i nformat ion. .Go 1den Eag 1es Golden eagles are opportunistic hunters.When avail- able,mammals are an important component of their diet (up to 70-98%by weight),but birds and carrion can also be important (cf.Brown and Amadon 1968). .In Alaska,there are few reports of prey items found at nests.Common items found in nests have included ground squirrels,marmots,snowshoe hares,ptarmigan, ducks and other waterfowl.Occasionally both arctic and red foxes are taken;one pai r on the Seward Pen- i nsul a took as many as 5-6 red foxes duri ng the summer, and the fledgling from that nest attacked a red fox -- 1-2 wk after it had left the nest (Roseneau and Springer,unpubl,.data)..Pairs nesting along sea coasts also take a variety of seabirds (both alive and as carrion). Carrion,often in the form of large game animals,is particularly important during the early spring and the fall.Carrion also appears to be very important to subadult golden eagles.Large numbers of subadults frequent the calving and post-calving grounds of cari- bou herds.Up to six subadults have been found feeding at one time on wolf-killed and bear-killed caribou,and subadults also occasionally have been observed to kill caribou calves (Roseneau and Curatolo 1976). Non-breeding of golden eagles occurs in some years,and therei s some evidence to suggest that prey avai 1- abi 1i ty may i nfl uence breedi ng success (cf.Brown and Amadon 1968;Mosher and White 1976). Golden eagles probably hunt throughout the Upper Susi tna Ri ver Basi n;however,they may avoi d heavi ly treed areas and may tend to spend more effort above and outside of the impoundment area than in it.A tendency to hunt over open treeless areas coupled with their varied diet suggests that the loss of hunting habitat as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir will have minor effects on golden eagles. • Ba1d Eag 1es Bald eagles are opportunistic in their feeding habits, and diets may vary from region to region according to the availability and vulnerability of prey species. E-3-326 - ~, ..... ~, "... ...... F" i .... Although they take a variety of live prey,bald eagles often rely heavily on local sources of carrion,may be attracted to dumps,and may pirate prey from other raptors,particularly ospreys (cf.Bent 1937;Brown and Amadon 1968;Sherrod et aL 1976).Fish are a princi- pal component of their diet in most regions. In Al aska,bald eagles rely heavily on dead or dying salmon when they are available,and take other species of fish as they can in shallow water or as carrion along shorelines.Waterfowl and seabirds (alcids and larids)are also important components of their diet, particularly in some coastal regions (e.g.,the Aleu- tian Islands).Dead,dying or injured birds are often taken from the water surface,but eagles are also cap- able of surprising and taking uninjured waterfowl and seabi rds from the water surface or in the ai r.Geese may also occasionally be taken in flights (Brown and Amadon 1968),and swans and sandhi 11 cranes have some- times been taken (D.Haynes,pers.comm.,Springer, pers.comm). In the Susitna River Valley,salmon are undoubtedly important to bald eagles in late summer,fall and winter.Earlier in the year,other fish species (par- ticularly whitefish,suckers and grayling)and water- fowl probably constitute the bulk of their diet.Snow- shoe hares and muskrats may also be taken on occasion. Bald eagles may hunt throughout the upper Susitna River basi n;however,they may tend to spend greater amounts of time at lower elevations near water bodies than gold~n eagles.Losses of hunting habitat to those bald eagles nesting in the upper river basin may be greater than losses to golden eagles as a result of construc- tion and filling of the Watana Reservoir;however, attraction of waterfowl to the impoundment may compen- sate in part for such losses.Overall,bald eagles in the upper basi n are probab ly more 1imited by avail- ability of nesting habitat than by availability of food.Hunting habitat including tributaries and water bodi es near the impoundment tone may be adequate for those eagl es that remai n after construction and fi 11 i ng of the Watana Reservoir. .Gyrfalcons Gyrfalcons are year-around residents of the arctic and subarctic and are opportunistic hunters.During the summer their diets vary according to the prey availa- bility and vulnerability (cf.Roseneau 1972),but they E-3-327 typically rely on only a few principal prey species for the bulk of their food (cf.Cade 1960;White and Cade 1971;Roseneau 1972).. The principal summer prey species include ptarmigan (often 70-90%by weight of their diet),arctic ground squirrels,and,in some regions,long-tailed jaegers (cf.White and Cade 1971;Roseneau 1972).In some regions of interior Al aska (e.g.,the Al aska Range) ground squirrels surpass ptarmigan in importance (cf. Cade 1960;Roseneau 1972).Mi gratory bi rds usually canst itute no more than 15-20%by wei ght of thei r sum- mer diet.In the winter,gyrfalcons are almost solely dependent on ptarmigan (cf.Platt 1976;Walker 1977), although in some regions arctic hares are also an important component of the diet (Muir 1973). Despite the reliance on a few principal prey species, gyrfalcons are capable of shifting to other food sources during the breeding season if the av~lability of a few prey species changes dramatically --provided that other prey species are present (cf.White and Cade 1971;Roseneau 1972).It has also been suggested that gyrfalcons may not breed in some years when prey avail- ability is low (cf.Hagen 1952;Cade 1960;Roseneau 1972). The reliance on ptarmigan,and the high utilization of small mammals,particularly ground squirrels,in the summer diet are important factors that have helped gyrfalcons to avoid serious biocide contamination and thus maintain healthy,non-endangered populations in the arctic (cf.Cade et al.1971;Walker 1977). Gyrfalcons may hunt up to 24 km from their nest loca- tions.Nelson (1978)used a helicopter to follow a male that hunted as far as 24 km from the nest. Another male hunted at or beyond 8 km from a nest in the Al aska Range,but the female hunted only within 2-3 km of the nest (Bente 1981). Gyrfalcons may also hunt throughout the upper Susitna River basin,but they tend to avoid wooded areas and probably spend most of their effort well above the impoundment zone.Their tendancy to hunt open,tree- less areas,including the Alpine zone,coupled with their opportunistic nature suggest that the loss of hunting habitat as a result of construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir will not be a serious impact. £-3-328 - - - 1I;'IlII&f.!" - .1l'\ll!IiIIl' -Disturbance Bald eagles and golden eagles are specifically protected under the U.S.Bald Eagle Act of 1940 (as subsequently amended).A part of this act prohibits the "taking ll of any bal d or golden eagl e or the nests or eggs of such birds without a permit.IITake u is defined to include molest or disturb.There are also state laws that pro- vide similar protection for these and the other raptor species. Much of the information on kinds and effects of distur- bance to raptors has been reviewed and summari zed by Roseneau et ale (1981).Most information is anecdotal. Responses of raptors to various types of disturbance are complex --several factors may affect the sensitivity of raptors to disturbance (Table E.3.W78).Timing of the disturbance is an important factor (Table E.3.W79).Fur- thermore,effects of di sturbance may be additi vee Responses of raptors to disturbance and the effects of these responses are often hi ghly vari able.In many cases,nesting raptors have shown a surprising degree of tolerance and habituation to disturbances (see Roseneau et ale 1981),yet in other cases the same types and 1evel s of di sturbance have had detrimental effects (see Roseneau et ale 1981).In general~.a mounting body of evidence suggests that raptors will habituate to and tol- erate at 1east moderate forms of di sturbance.The same body of evidence suggests that the most detrimental forms of disturbance are those that occur within(i .e.,nesting locations)territorial defense zones.Prolonged distur- bances,multiple disturbances,and direct overt harass- ment from either the ground or the air are parti cul arly harmful. Some species of raptors appear to be 1ess tol erant of di sturbance than others.Among the species in Al aska, gol den eagl es appear to be the most sens itive ,especi ally to aircraft di sturbance and human presence (see Roseneau et ale 1981).Although golden eagles,like most raptor speci es,are rel uctant to fl ush from nests as a resul t of aircraft passage during incubation,they often leave their nests well in advance of approaching aircraft during the nestling period (Roseneau et ale 1981).Fur- thermore,they often leave their nesting areas quickly when people approach,often at considerable distances (e.g.,as much as 0.8 km;Roseneau pers.obs.)from the nest.-Several documented nesti ng fail ures of gol den eagles·in some areas have been bl amed on human i nter- .ference{see Roseneau et al.1981). E-3-329 Nesting locations of raptors and ravens that may be sub- jected to disturbance by the construction and filling of the Watana Reservoir (with the exception of reservoir clearing operations)are listed in Table E.3.W76.Nest- ing locations were selected for inclusion on the basis of distance from project actions.Judgements as to the general level of disturbance were made on the basis of nest elevation above potential disturbance,distance to the disturbance,and general nature and scale of the dis- turbance,assuming year-round activity (clearing, material excavation and dam construction). Seven golden eagle nesting locations within or on the edges of the Watana impoundment may be susceptible to disturbance from reservoir clearing operations (see Figure E.3.W29:the exceptions are GE-7 and GE-10). Five of those locations will be inundated later.Two of the five locations will also be susceptible to consider- able disturbance from material excavation at Watana Borrow Si te J (see Tab 1e E.3.W76);however,both 1oc a- tions (GE-8 and GE-9)will be inundated.An eighth gol- den eagle nesting location (GE-ll)will be susceptible to considerable disturbance at Watana Borrow Site E.This latter location will probably be physically destroyed by material excavation unless some action is taken to speci- fically preserve it (e.g.,the establishment of a buffer zone around the nesting cliff). Four bald eagle nesting locations within the Watana impoundment are suscept ib1e to disturbance from reservoir clearing operations (see Figure E.3.W29:the exception is BE"1).At least two of the four locations are tree- nests that wi 11 eventually be flooded (8E-3 and BE-5), and one is a cliff nest that will eventually be inundated (BE-4).The fourth location (8E-2)is also likely to be inundated·or may be lost because of shoreline erosion unless specific safeguards are taken. No known gyrfalcon nesting locations appear susceptible to major disturbance from Watana construction;however, one location (GYR-1)may be susceptible to some distur- bance during reservoir clearing. At least one known goshawk nesting location will be sus- ceptible to disturbance from reservoir clearing (GOS-l); this nest will eventually be inundated (Figure E.3.W29). A second nesting location (GOS-2)is located in the Devil E-3-330 - - -, ~, , (xv) Canyon Reservoir,but may be susceptible to some distur- bance as a result of materi al excavation at Watana Borrow Site I (see Table E.3.W76). Twelve common raven nesting locations within or on the edges of the Watanaimpoundment may be susceptible to disturbance from reservoir clearing operations,but as many as 11 of them will eventually be inundated (see Figure E.3.W29:the exception is R-l).Three (R-9,R-IO and R-l1)of the locations that will eventually be inun- dated wi 11 also be susceptible to considerable di stur- bance associated with material excavation at Watana Borrow Site J (see Table E.3.W76).Two other nesting locations (R-14 and R-15)are located downstream of the Watana Dam site,but they may be susceptible to consider- able disturbance during excavation of materials from Watana Borrow Site H. Waterbirds Because of the low numbers and diversity of waterbirds in the Susitna basin (Section 4.2(c),(ii)),impacts from the Watana development wi 11 not have a major effect on regional populations.Waterbirds that do occur in the Susitnabasin wi 11 be affected during construction of theWatana develop- ment by some loss of habitat,alteration of habitat and disturbance. -Habi tat Loss Loons,grebes,swans and several of the duck species in the Susitna basi n occur primari iy on 1 akes (Appendix EF). These spec;es wi 11 not be affected seriously by loss of habitat since only 38 ha of lakes will be flooded by the Watana impoundment.Most species using the river will be more affected by habitat alteration (see below)than direct loss.However,some tree nesting ducks (golden- eyes,common merganser)wi 11 probably lose nesti ng trees during reservoir clearing.Goldeneyes prefer to nest in relatively large diameter cavities.Prince (1968) reported the small est cavity di ameter in hi s study to be 15.2 em.Most large trees are probably on the lower slopes of the Susitna valley and will be flooded. -Habitat Alteration During construction and filling,habitat alteration will occur primarily from clearing,flooding of shorelines and possibly siltation and shoreline changes in lakes where borrow areas are immediately adjacent. E-3-331 Clearing will have little effect on waterbirds with the possible exception,as noted in the,previous section,of cutting nest trees of some duck species.Flooding will eliminate shoreline nesting areas of common and red- breasted mergansers and harlequin ducks,and wi 11 prob- ably affect the fish-eating mergansers through some loss of food resources.Mainstream fish populations are not expected to be seriously affected by flooding but por- tions of the grayling populations in tributary streams may be lost (Section 2.3).Nevertheless,fish popu- lations will probably remain sufficient to support the low merganser numbers in the area and this impact wi 11 not be significant. If borrow areas were constructed on the shores of 1akes or streams,habitat for nesting waterbirds will be at least temporarily lost.The preliminary determination of potential borrow areas indicates that a number of lakes, creeks,and wetlands may be affected.Specific informa- tion about bird populations for most of these areas is lacking,but the generally low numbers of waterbirds found in Susitna Basin lakes suggests that few birds would be affected. Open water areas below the d am and near the intake wi 11 provide habitat for spring migrants when other waterbirds are sti 11 frozen.The reservoir wi 11 be of low quality to nesting waterfowl,but wi 11 provide habitat for mi- grating birds and molting waterfowl. -Disturbance A number of sources of di sturbance to waterbi rds wi 11 exist during Watana construction,but whether any of these will be sufficient to cause habitat abandonment is unknown.The main sources of disturbance will be borrow extract i on from wet 1and areas,transport of borrow and other materials,and if done in summer,reservoir clear- ing.The construction of the dam itself is a sufficient- ly localized disturbance and few waterfowl will be affec- ted. Waterbirds in tundra areas have been shown to avoid imme- diate areas of intense human activity (Barry and Spencer 1976)and similar avoidance would probably occur in other areas of open wetland.Most quantitative studies have been of aircraft disturbance.Results of most of these studies on ducks (e.g.,Gollop et.al 1974,Schweinsburg 1974,Schweinsburg,et al.1974,Ward.and Sharp 1974) have found changes in behavior,but little effect on distribution of nesting or moulting ducks.Geese and whistling swans occur in only small numbers during migration in the Susitna area and are unlikely to be much E-3-332 ~' ..... - - affected by di sturbance.Trumpeter swans nest in the upper basin,but primari ly.to the east of the project area;only small numbers occur in the Watana area during migration.Geese and swans are unlikely to be seriously affected by disturbance. (xvi)Other Birds -Construct i.on Terrestrial and shoreline birds will be affected by habi- tat loss through clearing of the reservoir area and areas for access roads,camps,borrow pits,and other facil- ities.Changes caused by clearing inclosed forests will also affect birds by permitting species that are asso- ci ated wi th edges to invade and,dependi ng on the extent of clearing,perhaps excluding species that require a closed canopy.Birds near the construction zones wi 11 a 1so be affected by sensory di sturbance from traffi c, noise,air emissions,and people. Habitat Loss Table E.3.W78 shows the proportionate loss of each habitat type.Forest habitats,especially deciduous (birch)and mixed forests wi 11 be most affected.These types support among the highest density and diversity of breeding birds in the upper Susitna area.Although only two species (hairy woodpecker and northern water- thrush)nested exclusively in deciduous or mixed forests,a number of speci es'occurred much more commonly in one or both of these habitats than else;.. where.These included spruce grouse,boreal chickadee, brown creeper,hermit and Swainson1s thrushes,yellow- rumped and blackpol warblers,and dark-eyed junco (see Sect ion 4.2 (c),(i i i) ). An attempt was made to est i mate the numbers of breed i ng pairs lost to the Watana development in relation to the population of the entire upper basin (Tables E.3.W79 and E.3.W80).The estimates were calculated using the densi ty of each species in the various vegetation types,and the areal extent of each vegetation type to be affected.Because only one or two census plots were established in each vegetation type,the estimates probably represent only the correct order of magnitude of loss for each species. The substantial variation in breeding bird densities between 1981 and 1982 (see Section 4.2 (c),(iii)) results in an equally substantial variation in the estimates of breeding pairs lost in the two years. E-3-333 Data from 17 years of roadside bird counts in the Fairbanks area (Kessel,pers.camm.)suggest that 1981 was a good year in terms of bi rd abundance for most species.Overall,an estimated 28,334 to 37,845 pairs of small and medium-sized upland birds will be lost because of flooding or clearing of habitat for the Watana development.In total,this represents 1.1%of the bird popul at ions of forest,shrub 1and,and mat and cusion tundra in the upper basin.Na estimates are available for other tundra habitats but only very small areas of tundra wi 11 be affected by the project.The species that will suffer the greatest numerical losses tend to be those that occur in hi gh densities in wi de~ spread habitats.Large numerical losses of Swainson's thrushes,ruby-crowned kinglets,yell ow-rumped warblers,Wilson's warblers,dark-eyed juncos,tree sparrows,and a few other species will occur (see Table E.3.W79).However,most of these species are abundant throughout the upper basin.Of the 12 species that will lose 2000 or more pairs,the loss represents 5%or more of the basin population for only three: Swainson's thrush,yellow-rumped warbler,and fox sparrow (Table E.3.W80). Species that will experience the largest proportionate loss are,not surprisingly,primarily those whose main habitats wi 11 be most affected..In addition to the three speci es ment i oned above,more than 5%of.the estimated upper basin population of spruce grouse, hairy woodpecker,boreal chickadee,brown creeper,and northern waterthrush populations will be lost.Al- though these losses represent a fairly substantial proportion of the local population of these species, none are rare in adj acent areas of A1 aska and these impacts will not have a serious effect on local popula- t ions. Habitat Alteration Habitat alteration resulting from clearing and con- struction of buildings,dams and borrow pits will have negative effects on some species and positive effects on others.Species of closed forests will be somewhat reduced in numbers near the cleared areas where clear- ings are in forested hab i tat,whereas speci es asso- ci ated with edges wi 11 probably increase.In some locations,local increases in species diversity may occur as a result of the increased interspersion of forest and edge habitat. E-3-334 - r- I Some species are capable of utilizing artificial habi- tats created by man and these species may benefit from certain habitat changes.For example,bank swallows and kingfishers may dig their nest cavities in sand walls of borrow areas that are not in active use or even in less disturbed areas of large pits that are in active use.Cliff swallows readily nest on buid1ings. Ravens (and possibly bald and golden eagles)wi 11 feed on road-killed wildlife;Ravens and gulls will feed at refuse dumps if these are not properly maintained. -Di sturbance Di sturbance to up1 and birds wi 11 result primarily from road traffice and is discussed in Section 4.3 (c).Some disturbance may also result from activities of people at borrow pits and the construction site but there is little quantitative information about the effects of such dis- turbance.Local disturbance of this nature will not have any serious effect on populations of upland birds. -Filling Since the reservoir is to be cleared,most of the habitat loss associated with the Susitna project will occur dur- ing the construction phase and was discussed above.Dur- ing filling,the species that will be affected are those that had invaded the cutover area (mainly birds and shrub habitats)and birds dependent on shorelines,mudbars,and streams.These are primari ly shorebirds and the dipper. Dippers inhabit fast-running mountain streams·and dipper habitat will be lost to the extent that the lower reaches of such streams are flooded.Dippers also winter in the Susitna area along the open water or fast running streams and the Susitna Ri ver itself.Loss of some of these areas of open water could result in lowered population, but alternate areas of open water will be available else- where. During filling,the sandbars,islands,and shorelines used by shorebirds will be flooded.Three breeding species (spotted sandpiper,greater ye11ow1egs,and semi- palmated plover)and about seven migrant species will be affected.The Susitna River does not seem to be a major staging area for shorebirds and the loss of habitat for migrants will have insignificant effects.All of the breed"ing shorebird habitat in the impoundment area will be lost but all species are present in adjacent areas. E-3-335 -Operation During operation of the Watana development,some feeding habitat for spring migrant shorebirds will probably be created in the drawdown zone.Feeding habitats for fall mi grants wi 11 not be created because the reservoi r wi 11 be full in fall. The abundance and species composition of birds along the downstream reaches of the river wi 11 change as new riparian vegetation invades areas of the floodplain and proceeds through the successi onal stages descri bed in Section 3.2.These changes will be most visible in the reaches north of Talkeetna where changes in vegetat ion will be most pronounced.Because bird densities and species diversities are highest in tall shrub and mature forest stands (see Section 4.2 (c),(iii)),the vegetat i on changes over 100-200 years could be considered beneficial to breeding birds.However,the proportionate changes in species abundance in the study area as a whole will be very small during the license period. (xvi)Non-game (small)Mammals Population densities of most species of small rodents fluc- tuate widely under natural circumstances (Krebs and Myers 1974,Kessel et al.1982),and it is consequently difficult to predict post-construction population levels.Although the populations of some species will be diminished due to the project,most species respond quickly to disturbance, abandoning some areas and colonizing new ones.In addi- tion,reproductive rates of small mammals are high and most populations can recover quickly from population reductions if sufficient food resources and space are available. Only those species of small mammals that are restricted to dense forest habitats are·expected to show marked de- creases,primarily due to loss of forest to the impoundment and construction sites.These decreases may,in turn,be reflected in certain carnivore or raptor spe~ies that depend on small mammals for prey. During the construction phase,small mammals will mainly be affected by the clearing of the impoundment area,the bor- row pits and the construction camp.Over 110 km 2 .of for- est wi 11 be cl eared.Th e speci es that are restri cted to forest habitats and will thus be most affected are porcu- pines,snowshoe hares,pygmy shrews,and red squi rre1s. Small numbers of hares and porcupines,and extremely small numbers of pygmy shrews were observed in the project area. Because the area does not seem to be prime habitat for the former two species (Kessel et al.1982),their regional densit i es are not expected to be affected by the project. E-3-336 ,~ ~! ~, ~, (b) Red sq.ui rre 1s are common throughout the forested areas of the project area.Over 80 km 2 (3.5 percent)of their preferred spruce habitat will be cleared. The other species that wi 11 be affected by the clearing during Watana construction will be the northern re~-backed vole.Red-backed voles were found in nearly every habitat type in the Watana area~but were most common in spruce and cottonwood forests.Some decrease in overall abundance of this species is expected. Duri ng the three-year fi 11 i ng stage~many of the areas cleared during construction will be colonized by early suc- cessional plant species and small mammals.Meadow voles are expected to thrive in such areas (Dabbs et a1.1974). Tundra voles~masked shrews,and arctic shrews may also recolonize these areas ..As water levels rise during the filling stage~these populations of small mammals will be displaced~and most wi 11 be drowned.However,no substan- tial reductions in regional populations are expected as a result of these effects. The major impact on small mammals during ·the operation phase of Watana Dam will be the changes caused by succes- sion of disturbed areas such as the borrow pits and camps, and of the newly exposed land downstream of t~e dam. Species that occur in grasslands and earl y successional communities will be favored initially.These include meadow voles~and in some cases~tundra voles~masked shrews and arct ic shrews.As successi on progresses to shrublands,the habitat will improve for species such as northern red-backed voles and masked shrews.Any revegeta- tion using non-native grass species will favor meadow voles,perhaps to the exclusion of other species (Bodrer and Wooley 1974).Attempts to reforest areas using tree seedlings are unlikely to succeed because of girdling by the high densities of meadow voles expected in disturbed areas. Devil Canyon Development (i)Moose Because of steep topography and extensive mature forests in the Devil Canyon area~fewer moose occur in this portion of the Susitna basin than in the area to the east of Watana Creek (Ballard et a1.1982a).Distributions of moose observed during surveys in March 1981 suggest that moose were not common in the vi ci nity of the Devi 1 Canyon dam site but became more abundant in upstream areas near the Watana dam site.Ballard et a1.(1982a)estimated that 30 moose were present within the Devil Canyon impoundment area E-3-337 duri ng a census in 1ate March 1981.Because of the mi ld winter conditions,this census probably underestimates the number of moose that would be present during winters with deeper snows. Because of the low numbers of moose in the Devi 1 Canyon area,impacts on moose in this region are of less concern than in the Watana development area.The range of impacts to moose that may result from the Dev;1 Canyon project are similar to those already discussed for the Watana project. Potential impacts include loss of habitat,alteration of habitat,interference with seasonal movements,mechanical and human disturbance,hazards associated with the drawdown zone,and hunting mortality.Impacts associ ated wi th the access roads,the railway and transmission lines are dis- cussed in Section 4.3 (c)and (d). -Construction Construct i on of the Devil Canyondam will i nvo 1ve intense construction activity at the actual dam site,establish- ment of a temporary camp,removal of the forest cover in the impoundment,and .the excavation and transportation of borrow material.The most important effects of construc- tion on moose will be habitat loss,mortality,inter- ference with seasonal movements,and disturbance.As discussed for the Watana project,alteration of habitat resulting from construction activities will be minimal and effects on moose will be negligible. .Habi tat Loss An estimated 32 km 2 will be cleared within the Devil Canyon impoundment area and an additional 214 ha wi 11 be used for operational areas,campsites and borrow pits.Losses of major forest cover types in relation to their availability indicate that the greatest pro- portion of losses will occur in woodland spruce,open spruce,and mixed forest cover types (Table 1).Be- cause moose in the Susi tna basin were most commonly relocated in spruce forest than in any other forest cover type (Ballard et ale 1982a),the loss of spruce habitat in the vicinity of Devil Canyon may be impor- tant to moose.However,the limited area of bottomland habitats and the steep slopes of the Susitna River valley in the Devil Canyon area probably limits present use by moose,and the loss of valley habitats in the impoundment area may not be as serious as it ini,tially appears.Althollgh almost all of the low elevation habitat will be lost,moose do not appear to commonly winter in the Devil Canyon area.As a result,loss of low elevation habitats probably will not appreciably alter overwinter survival of moose in the Devil Canyon area. E-3-338 ,WiJ!:f! - ,~ ~, - ..... ..... •Interference with Movements The Devi 1 Canyon impoundment generally wi 11 not exceed 1.6 km in wi dth.C1 eari ng of vegetati on in the im- poundment area may present a visual barri er to moose movements, and di sturbances associated with c1 eari ng operations and construction could block or alter migra- t i on paths across or along the ri ver.Moose re10ca- t i ons in the Devi 1 Canyon area suggest that no major movement corridors for moose exist within the Devil Canyon impoundment area,but more frequent cross i ngs may occur once the Watana impoundmenti s present. •Disturbance Effects of di sturbance on moose in the Devil Canyon area wi 11 be mi ni ma 1 and wi11 be si mil ar to those impacts discussed for the Watana project. •Mortal ity Although a few moose may be killed as a result of col- lisions with vehicles or other accidents associated with constructi on areas,the effect of those mortal i- ties on moose populations will be negligible.The major mortal ity factor associated with the construction of the Devi 1 Canyon dam wi 11 be the probab1 e increase in hunti ng associ ated with the inf1 ux of constructi on workers and other personnel to a previously·remote area.Because moose wi 11 be more abundant in the Watana area than in the Devi 1·Canyon area,hunt i ng activity by Devil Canyon personnel will likely be con- centrated to the east of the project area.Effects of hunting on moose are described in more detail for the two development areas in Section 4.3(c),(i). -Filling Operation The fill i ng phase of the Devil Canyon impoundment is estimated to be approximately 2 months (as opposed to 3-4 years for the Watana project).In addition.the drawdown zone (to 15 m in some years during August and September) wi 11 be 1ess than 1 m .for most of the year.Because of the smaller area,local topography,the small drawdown zone during most of the year.and the rapid filling sequence.the effects of the Devi 1 Canyon project on moose wi 11 be much 1ess severe than those of the Watana project.The major impacts to moose will be alteration of habitat,loss·of habitat.blockage of movements, mortality.and disturbance. E-3-339 ·Alteration of Habitat As di scussed for the Watana project,the Devil Canyon impoundment wi 11 cause some alterations of vegetat ion in the vicinity of the impoundment and in areas down- stream from the dam. Alteration of vegetation in the vicinity of the im- poundment may occur as a resu 1t of several mi croc 1i- matic changes such as seasonal temperatures,wind dir- ect i on and speed,and ice fog.Effects of these changes on moose wi 11 probably be minimal (Section 4.3 (a),(i)). Alteration of vegetation downstream of the Devil Canyon site,however,may affect the distribution,abundance, arid quality of moose habitat.The combined effects of the Watana and Devil Canyon dams will result in in- creased water temperatures in·downstream porti ons of the river,and it is anticipated that the Susitna River wi 11 remai n open from the Devi 1 Canyon dam to Talkeetna.Flow regimes following completion of the Devil Canyon dam are not expected to differ greatly from flow regimes of the Watana project.Hence,no additional differences in vegetation resulting from lower water flows are expected when the Devi 1 Canyon dam becomes operational. Open water in the Devil Canyon-Talkeetna reach of the Susitna River will affect vegetation in several ways. Steam fog will be common over the open water reach dur- ing winter.Because of the high moisture content of the air,icing of vegetation along the river will occur.However,the area of riparian habitat that will be affected depends on several topographical and clima- tic factors,and cannot be accurately predicted.It is also not known if plant productivity will be detrimen- tally affected by icing or if moose will utilize iced winter browse.As a result,impacts on moose associ a- ted with vegetation icing along the Devil Canyon- Talkeetna portion of the Susitna River are difficult to assess. Because of the open water condit ions in the Devil Canyon-Talkeetna reach,ice scouring of lower level riparian areas will not occur during the spring. Annual disturbance of successional growth in these areas wi 11 be reduced (a 1though flood i ng wi 11 st i 11 scour some areas)and the area may succeed to ri pari an shrub communities.If this is the case,moose may benefit from an increased availability of riparian habitat. E-3-340 - ~, As discussed for theWatana project,bankfull flooding will be reduced by the Susitna project.Ri pari an communities on hlgher ground of the river channel will gradually succeed to cottonwood forest but at the same t-ime will extend downward into the newly-exposed areas of the river channel.Periodic flooding for fisheries management may provi de suffi ci ent di sturbances of these riparian communities to maintain productive riparian growth. Interference with Movements Movements of moose in the vicinity of the Devil Canyon impoundment and downstream of the dam -may be affected by the Devil Canyon project.Moose attempting to cross the impoundment area may be inhibited by visual factors such as the 1.6 km wide impoundment or the presence of open water areas in wi nter.The wi dth of the i mpound- ment is not likely to present a physical barrier to moose in summer,but winter open water areas could deflect movements. Moose in the Devil Canyon-Ta 1keetna reach of the Susitna Ri ver overwi nter in ri pari an habitats and on river i sl ands of the Susitna Ri ver (Modafferi 1982). Parturient cows apparently prefer to calve on river islands or in riparian areas,presumably because of the avai 1abil ity of hi gh quality forage and reduced numbers of predators (Stringham 1974).The presence of open water between the dam and Talkeetna may interfere with -use of these river island habitats during the winter and the early portion of the calving period.Moose in northern British Columbia are not known to cross sec..;. tions of open water downstream of dams during winter (F.Harper,pers.comm.).The effects of exposure to sub-zero temperatures following crossing of open water would presumably-physiologically stress moose during a period when their energy balance is -already pre- carious . .Disturbance Mechanical and human disturbance should decline in the Devil Canyon area once the d am becomes operat i on a l. Although it is not known to what extent the region will be used for recreational activities,increased access would maintain disturbance levels at a higher level than is currently encountered,but at a level much lower than during construction.If animals are not directly harassed,disturbances during the filling and operation stages will at most have a slight effect on moose distributions. E-3-341 .Mortality During the filling and operation of the Devil Canyon d am,moose mortal i ty may increase as a result of hunt- ing and accidental deaths (see Section 4.3 (a),(i}). .Devi 1 Canyon:Summary of Impacts The construction and operation of the Devil Canyon dam will likely have only a moderate to minimal impact on moose populations in the upper Susitna bas)n.Because the Devil Canyon project will follow the Watana devel- opment,moose populations will already have been great- ly reduced.By comparison,further reductions result- i ng from the Devi 1 Canyon dam wi 11 be mi nimal.The most substantial impacts of the Devil Canyon project are,in order of decreasing severity,loss of habitat, blockage of movements,alteration of habitat,acciden- tal mortality,and hunting mortality. Effects of habitat alteration wi 11 be minimal in the vicinity of the impoundment.In downstream areas,how- ever,increased water temperatures with subsequent open water conditions could reduce the availability and pro- ductivity of winter browse in the Devil Canyon- Talkeetna reach of the river.Moose in this area over- winter and calve in these riparian communities and gen- erally spend most of the year within a narrow corridor bordering these areas.Effects on the few moose occur- ring in this area would be moderate to severe. Clearing and inundation of the impoundment area will result in the permanent loss of small areas of winter range,calving areas,and breeding areas.Effects on moose may be moderate to minimal. Hunter mortality,blockage of movements,and accidental mortality will have only minimal impacts on moose. (ii)Caribou Few impacts of the Devil Canyon development on caribou are expected.The impoundment area,parti cul ar ly the area near the dam site,has recei ved 1itt 1e use by cari bou either historically or in recent years.A small portion of the Nelchina herd may occasionally cross the impoundment,but because the crossing hazards are expected to be less severe than those associated with the Watana impoundment,no sub- tantial impacts are expected.There may be some impacts on caribou resulting from aircraft disturbance and the Watana to Devi 1 Canyon road segment --these wi 11 be simi 1ar to those associated with the Watana development,and are dis-· cussed in Section 4.3 (a),(ii)and 4.3 (c),(ii). £-3-342 - - (i i 1)Da 11 Sheep The construction,fi 11 i ng and operat i on of the Devil Can- yon Dam will have no direct impact on any of the three Da1l sheep populations in the upper Susitna basin.All three populations are far removed from the dam site. Any increase in ai r traffi c to the Watana ai rstri p due to the construction of the Devil Canyon dam has the potential for disturbing the Mt.Watana-Grebe Mt.population (coming from the south)or the Portage-Tsusena Creek population (coming from the north).The effects of aircraft traffic on Da11 sheep are discussed in Section 4.3(a),(iii). (i v)Brown Bears The impacts of the construction of the Devil Canyon dam on brown bears will be similar to those during construction of the Watana dam,except that the number of bears affected wi 11 be much smaller.The area near the Devi 1 Canyon site .r-is at lower elevations and is not prime habitat for brown bears. Some human/bear contact is likely to occur during the con- struction of the dam,leading to increased bear mortality. As discussed in Section 4.3(a),(iv).improper food and garbage handling practices will increase problems with bears.Avoidance of areas of human activity by bears will cause some habitat loss,but because a relatively small area of low value to brown bears wi 11 be affected,no population effect is likely. Steep canyon walls will confine most of the Devil Canyon impoundment,thus minimizing the area inundated.There will be some loss of riparian areas,with its associated food sources -berries,early spring greenery,and moose calves.No potenti a1 denning areas wi 11 be affected. Other long-term effects of the Devi 1 Canyon development, such as increased hunting and aircraft disturbance,will be similar to those associated with the Watana development, but at a reduced scale. (v)Black Bears ..... The impacts of the Devi 1 Canyon development on the local black bear population will be substantially less than those for Watana,because only a small portion of acceptable black bear habitat in that area will be lost.The impact on denning areas will also be considerably less;only one of 16 den sites found in the vicinity of the Devil Canyon impoundment will be flooded.Most of the potential impacts E-3-343 discussed for the Watana development will exist,but at a much-reduced level.Downstream effects of the Devil Canyon impoundment should be the same as those discussed in Section 4.3(a),(v). (vi)Wolf Impacts from the Devil Canyon development will be very sim- i lar to those from the Watana development.No known dens or rendezvous sites will be affected,but this area has not been intensively searched for dens.Nevertheless,loss of den sites is not expected to have significant effects on wolf populations.Similarly,disturbance is not expected to affect wolves except possibly at den sites during May and June.Wol f pups moved from dens because of di sturbance when they are very young may not survive (Ballard et al. 1982b). It was argued in Section 4.3(a),(vi)that wolf populations are unlikely,at their present levels,to be seriously affected by loss of prey species.The same situation holds for the Devil Canyon development;only in the event that management objectives require higher wolf populations would loss of prey species become a potentially significant impact.. (vii)Wolverine The effects of the Devi 1 Canyon development on wol veri ne will be insignificant except for the potential of increased trapping as discussed in Section 4.3(c),(vii).Because wolverines range over large areas,the relatively minor changes in food avail abil ity and the effects of i ntensi ve human activity near the construction site should not noticeably affect the few wol veri nes near the Devil Canyon development area. (viii)Belukha Whale As discussed in Section 4.3(a),(viii),the combined opera- tion of Watana and Devil Canyon should have no detectable effect on belukha whales in Cook Inlet. (ix)Beaver The Devil Canyon project could have a beneficial effect on beaver if the reservoir level is stable within 1 m for most of the year as proposed.Several beaver colonies now occurring within Borrow Area K and near the camp site will be adversely affected,but a sl ight improvement in down- stream habitat resul t i ng from alack of ice cover down to Talkeetna,and the possible use of the reservoir by beavers,will offset these impacts. E-3-344 ~. """ - ...... -, .... (x) No beaver are known to occupy the Devi 1 Canyon Reservoi r and thus no adverse impact is expected as a result of i nun- dation.However,during the period between the filling of the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon reservoirs,some beavers may colonize this reach and be initially displaced.Approxi- mately 10 beaver are known to occupy the 1akes in and adj acent to Borrow Area K and the proposed constructi on camp,and these areas will probably be lost during con- struction. Downstream effects should be the same as with Watana only, except that the 1ack of ice cover from Devi 1 Canyon to Talkeetna may allow beaver use of some sloughs and side channels that are subject to freeze-out when ice cover is present. Muskrat Construction of the Devil Canyon Dam should have no direct impacts upon muskrats as no suitable habitat is known from the construction or borrow sites (Table M-l).Some habitat loss may occur from building camp facilities if ponds and lakes are filled in for roads,work pads,etc.Downstream effects will be similar to those described in Section 4.3(a),(x). If construction camp personnel and their families are allowed to trap in the area,muskrat populations throughout the lakes lying on either side of the Susitna River could be affected ..Gipson et ale (1982)found muskrat sign in these lakes,and noted their vulnerability to trapping. No impact is foreseen from vegetation removal in the im- poundment zone,or from subsequent flooding. (xi)Mink and Otter Effects of the Devil Canyon project on mink and otter will be similar to those already discussed for the Watana proj- eCt (Section 4.3(a),(xi}),but because of the smaller size of the impoundment and the more stable water level,effects wi 11 be less severe.Because mink are most abundant east of Kosina Creek,the Devil Canyon project will probably -have little effect on the regional population.Major impacts to otter and mink are loss of habitat,reduction in prey availability,increased human disturbance,and barriers to movement. £-3-345 Because the combi ned·Devi 1 Canyon project and the Watana project wi 11 probab ly result in permanent 1y open water from Devil Canyon to Ta1keetna~mink and otter may be positively affected.Both speci es prefer areas of open water in rivers and streams in winter (Barber et al.1975).Open water areas in the reservoir during winter should also have beneficial effects. (xii)Coyote and Red Fox Coyotes are probably slightly more common in the Devil Canyon area than in the Watana area but they are sti 11 sufficiently uncommon that the project is unlikely to have any effect on them.As in the case of the Watana develop- ment,foxes wi 11 be affected primari 1y by increased trapp- ing and by destruction of nuisance animals if garbage is not regularly incinerated and regulations against feeding enforced.Habitat loss wi 11 not be a major impact since faxes tend to occur at mid and high elevations rather than in the forested areas along the river. (xiii)Other Terrestrial Furbearers Lynx,weasels,and marten wi 11 all be affected by the Devi 1 Canyon development primarily by loss of habitat.As in the case of the Watana development,no estimates of the poten- tial reduction in numbers of lynx and weasels can be made. Approximately 14 marten will be lost to the impoundment and construction sites,borrow pits~etc.If both Watana and Devi 1 Canyon are bui 1t,about 11.5 percent of the Upper Susitna Basin marten population will be lost (access road and transmission line not included).80th of these esti- mates are based on the conservative marten density derived in Section 4.3(a),(xiii). Marten,lynx~and weasels may be disturbed by construction activity but there is no evidence that they wi 11 vacate areas as a result of these disturbances. (xiv)Raptorsand Ravens -Construction and Filling Construct i on and fi 11 i ng of the Devi 1 Canyon reservoi r would have the same kind of effect on raptors and ravens as the Watana deve10pment~and would increase overall imp act to those spec i es;however,the increase wou1 d repesent a relatively small proportion of the total impact of both developments. E-3-346 ,..,.. ..... - - - ~, ,..... •Habitat Loss At least 2 (12%)of the 16 total known golden eagles nesting locations in the general vicinity of the Devil Canyon impoundment wi 11 be directly lost (Tab1 e E.3.W76).The cumulative loss of golden eagle nests to both projects represents 41-50%of known nest locations in the project area (Table E.3.W75). No ba 1d eag1 e nest i ng 1 ocat ions wi 11 be lost as a result of Devil Canyon construction and filling. No know gyrfalcon nesting locations will be inundated by the Devi 1 Canyon reservoir,but one of three tbta1 1 ocat ions may be located in Borrow site K (see Table E.3.W76).If so,this nesting location may be lost during material excavation,,but overall impact to this species in the upper basin will remain minimal. Over (33%)of three known goshawk nesting locations in the general vicinity of the Devil,'Canyon project will be directly lost to clearing and filling of the Devil Canyon reservoir (Fi gure E.3.W30,Table E.3.W75 and E.3.W76).The nest 1ocat i on that wi 11 be lost is one of two di scovered to date upstream of the Devi 1 Canyon dam site.Although the loss of this goshawk nesting location doubles the number lost as a result of both reservoirs,total impacts to this woodland species are anticipated to remain minimal because appropriate nesting habitat appears to be relatively limited in both impoundments. Four (19%)of 21 previously used raven nesting locations in the general vicinity of the Devil Canyon project will be lost as a result of construction and filling of the Devil Canyon Reservoir (Figure E.3.W30 Tables E.3.W75 and E.3.W76).All four will be lost by inundation,and one additional nest (R-19)will remain only a few meters above maximum flood level (see Figure E.3.W30). Although construct i on and fi 11 i ng of the Devil Canyon Res ervoi r wi 11 increase the number of used nest i ng locations to 13-14 (62-67%of the previous total)(see Table E.3.W75),total impact to ravens is still anticipated to be relatively low.Loss of nesting 1 ocati ons in Devil Canyon will probably increase the importance of remaining cliff areas to there (see Table L3.W77)and in side tributaries.It may also increase the importance of trees for nesting (see Section 4.3 4.3(a),(xiv)). E-3-347 ·Di sturbance Five golden eagle nesting locations within or on the edges af the Devi 1 Canyon impoundment may be suscept- ible to disturbance from reservoir clearing operations (see Figure E.3.W30:the two exceptions are GE-19 and GE-18).One and perhaps two of those locations wi 11 be inundated 1ater (GE-13 and GE-14).One of the five locations (GE-ll)may be susceptible to disturbance from the cleari ng operat ions in the Devi 1 Canyon area only if it remains following the excavation of mater- i al s from Watana Borrow Site E.One other gryfalcon nesting location (GE-18)is about 0.9 km downstream of the Devil Canyon dam site and may be susceptible to considerable disturbance as a result of activities associated with the construction of the dam itself. No known bald eagle nesting locations appear suscept- ible to disturbance as a result of activities associa- ted with the construction of the Devi 1 Canyon dam, clearing operations within the impoundment zone,or filling of the reservoir. Two known gyrfalcon nesting locations in the Devi 1 Canyon impoundment area may be susceptible to distur- bance.One of those locations (Gyr-2)may be suscep- tible to some disturbance during the reservoir clearing,and the subsequent increase in human presence as recreation activities develop and increase along the impoundment edges.A second location (Gyr-3)may be susceptible to considerable disturbance from excavation and transport of materi al s from Devi 1 Canyon Quarry Site K. At least two known goshawk nesting locations (tree nests)may be susceptible to disturbance from construc- tion and filling of the Devil Canyon Reservoir.One of these nesting locations (GOS-2)is within the Devil Canyon reservoir.It may be susceptible to disturbance from material excavation (0.2 km to the west)at Watana Borrow Si te I (see Watana di sturbance goshawks)and will eventually be cut down during reservoir clearing operations prior to inundation (Figure E.3.W30).The other nesting location (GOS-3)is situated well above the reservoir level,but di sturbance from human presence may increase as recreational activities develop along the impoundment edges. Six raven nesting locations within or on the edges of the Devil Canyon impoundment may be susceptible to disturbance from reservoir clearing operations,but four of these will eventually be inunudated (see Fig~re E.3.W30:the exceptions are R-19 and R-21).One of the E-3-348 - - - .... (xv) (xvi) locations not inundated (R-19)will remain only a few meters above maximum flood level.The other nesting locations that is not inundated (R-21)is about 0.7 km downstream of the Dev;1 Canyon dam si te and may be suscept;b1e to di sturbance during constructi on of the dam. Waterbirds The Devil Canyon impoundment will benefit the waterbirds in the upper basin,although initially the clearing and con- struction activities may cause a temporary loss of suitable h abi tat.The open water area near each end of the reservoir should benefit some early and later migrants when other waterbirds are frozen. Downstream effects will be similar to those discussed in Section 4.3(a),(xv).These will consist mostly of distributional shifts and minor changes in relative abund ance of ri pari an spec i es as new1 y-formed veget at ion proceeds through the successi ona1 sequence descri bed in Section 3.2. Other Birds The Devil Canyon development wi 11 result in the same types of impacts (habitat loss,habitat alteration,disturbance, direct mortali1ty)with the same types of effects on ter- restrial and shoreline birds as the Watana development (see Section 4.3(a),(xvi)). F1 oodi ng of the Devi 1 Canyon impoundment wi 11 increase the proportionate loss of mixed forest in the upper basin by 3%' over that lost to the Watana development (Table E.3.W78). The Devil Canyon impoundment area contains only small stands of a few hectares of birch forest,the habitat with the largest proportionate loss to the Watana development. These additional birch forest stands will be lost by flooding of the Devil Canyon impoundment.Overall,an estimated 5248 to 7602 breeding pairs (0.2%of the upper basi n popu1 at i on)wi 11 be lost to the Devi 1 Canyon development (Table E.3.W79).For a few species,the proportionate loss to Devil Canyon results in a substantial increase over the loss to theWatana Development alone. For example,if both developments are bui It,an estimated 19.9%of the upper basin brown creeper population will be lost (Table E.3.W80).Devil Canyon will also result in a 3-5%increase in the number of spruce grouse,yel10w- rumped warblers and northern water thrushes lost. E-3-349 The drawdown of the Devil Canyon impoundment will be small and no feeding habitat for shorebirds will be created.As is the case for the Watana development,the dipper will be affected by loss of breedi ng habitat in the lower reaches of feeder streams and loss of wi nter hab it at (open water) in both feeder streams and the Susitna River itself.How- ever,open water in the reservoir may compensate for thi s loss. (xvii)Non-Game (small)Mammals The types of impacts on small mammals that will result from construction of Devil Canyon Dam will be similar to those a1re.ady discussed for the Watana Dam (see Section 4.3(a), (xvii).The major impact will be loss of habitat due to clearing ~perations.The total area affected (approximate- ly 34 km )and percent of forested 1 and affected (0.7 percent)are much smaller than in the Watana reservoir area.The impacts on small mammals are thus expected to be proportionately smaller. (c)Access (i)Moose Construction and operation of the gravel the Watana access road from the Denali Hi ghway to the Watana dam site and the 1ater constructio.n and operation of the Devil Canyon access. road will have few direct impacts on moose populations in the Susitna basin.Possible impacts include a loss of habitat,alteration of habitat,disturbance and subsequent avoi dance of the hi ghway,interference with seasonal move- ments,and mortality.Moose will be affected to a much greater degree by the indirect effects of the access road, particularly hunting.Moose numbers would decline as a result of hunting mortality and avoidance of the corridor by moose.The railway from the Go1 d Creek area wi 11 have. similar effects to those mentioned for the access roads, except that hunting mortality should be lower (as a result of poor vehicular access)and collision mortality during the winter may be higher. -Mortality The primary impact of the access roads will be the pro- vision of improved pub1 ic access to previously remote areas in the Susitna basin.In turn,improved access will probably result in localized declines in moose as a result of hunting and avoidance of the highway corridor because of disturbance.Declines in moose along newly-opened roads or along roads in areas opened for E-3-350 - ,~ - -. - - - - hunting have been reported for a number of northern areas (Goddard 1970;Cumming 1974;·Ritchey 1974;Beak 1979). Although a good port i on of these dec 11 nes in moose were the result of hunting mortality,moose probably also avoid areas in the vicinity of access corridors during the hunting period. A dec li ne in moose numbers duri ng construction of the Watana access road can be expected as a result of hunt- ing.Effects would probably be most severe in the vicin- ity of campsites or the townsite.Public access to the Susitna basin will increase once the road is operational and further increases in hunting pressure will occur with resultant increases in hunting mortality of moose. Because the moose population will already be stressed by impacts associ ated with the Wat ana development and the subsequentredi stri buti on of moose within the Susitna basi n,di sturbances associ ated with hunt i ng and hunti ng mort al itymay further aggravate impacts to the moose population.Because the Watana development will reduce the carrying capacity of the Susitna basin for moose,it is possible that moose numbers will exceed those optimal for sustained productivity.Assuming that surplus moose may be present,carefully managed hunting may effectively mitigate for some indirect project effects. Construct ion and operat i on of the Watana-Devi 1 Canyon access road segment and.the rai lway wi 11 result in sim- i lar but less severe impacts on moose.The Devil Canyon segment will provide new access to a relatively smaller area,much of which is poorer quality moose habitat than in the Watana dam area.The rai lway wi 11 not provide as easy an access route to the general public as the road- ways,and its use can be better controlled.Hunting pressure consequently will not increase as in the case of the access roads.In addition,much of the area that will be affected by railway access supports relatively low numbers of moose as compared to lower reaches of the Susitna Ri ver. During the construction and operation of the access roads and railway,moose may be killed as a result of collis- ions with vehicles.However,low volumes of road traffic (fewer daily trips than now occurring on the Denali Highway)are expected along the Watana and Devil Canyon access roads even during construction of the dams,and the numbers of kills will likely be small.Consequently, effects on the population will be negligible. E-3-351 In contrast.collision mortalities along the railway could be substantial.An additional 8 train trips per week in each direction are expected during the construct- ion of the Devil Canyon dam.Rausch (1958)reported adjusted.kill totals of 366 and 179 moose kills along a 86.9 km section of the Alaska Railway (Houston to Talkeetna)during the winters 1955-56 and 1956-57.re- spectively.During the winters of 1970-1971 through 1978-79,annual moose kills along the Willow-Talkeetna portion of the Alaska railway ranged from 0 to 151 ani- mals (Alaska Dept.Fish and Game.unpubl.data). Because moose are easily trapped in the steep snow embankments along railway lines and are usually more abundant in v a.11 ey bottom habitats duri ng wi nters with high snows,higher numbers of collision mortalities occur along rights-of-ways in low elevation areas during severe winters.Moose in the Devil Canyon-Talkeetna area are believed to winter in lower elevation habitats along the valley bottoms (Modafferi 1982).As a result.it is likely that the operation of a low elevation railway linking Devil Canyon to the Alaska railway will result in numbers of collision mortalities of moose that will vary in relation to snow depths and winter severity. -Loss of Habitat Construction of the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon access roads and the rai lwaywi 11 result in loss of habitat associ ated with the construction corridor and borrow pits.Although the actual removal of moose browse will be small in rela- tion to its availability in other areas of the Susitna basin,the effective loss may be greater if moose avoid the access corridors or if migration routes are blocked. As discussed above.moose will tolerate disturbance along access corri dors if they are not hunted.However.if hunting is permitted.moose may avoid an area of several kilometers from the corridor.consequently increasing the effective area of lost habitat. Based on existing information.no special use areas for moose such as wintering range,calving areas,or breeding concentrati ons wi 11 be rendered unusable by the road access corri dors.However,because most speci al use areas will be inundated by the impoundments.these road corridors could affect the location of new special use areas.Anticipating such changes is obviously diffi- cult. E-3-352 -- - - (i i) The problem of railway corridors in moose wintering areas and resulting collision mortalities has already been discussed.Because a low volume of train traffic is anticipated,it is unlikely that the railway will inter- fere with movements to or from wintering range or calving areas. -Alteration of Habitat Construction of the access road and railway will necessitate the use of gravel berms which may impede or alter drai nage systems (Boelter andCl ose 1974,Kemper et a 1.1977).Permanent fl oodi ngof forested areas may result in the loss of some moose habitat through killing of trees and shrubs.However,growth of aquatic plants withi n flooded areas may parti ally compensate thi sloss by providing additional summer forage.Drainage of wet- land areas may result in a temporary increase in the growth of seral shrub communities,but without periodic flooding or disturbance,these areas will eventually develop into forest stands with low browse production. -Interference with Seasonal Movements The proposed road access corri dors wi 11 cross several areas where moose migrate seasonally between summer and winter ranges (Ballard et al.1982a).Concentrations of movements by radi a-co 11 ared moose that may be affected by the Watana road i ncl ude the Watana-Butte Creeks area,and the Watana-Deadman Creeks area (Section 4.2 (a),(i)). During construction,mechanical activities may prevent some moose from crossing the road corridors,primarily as a result of moose avoiding the construction area.Avoid- ance of the road corridor would probably be most severe during the hunting season,if hunting is permitted. Steeply-sloped road berms and/or the creation of deep snow embankments from road-plowing may act as physical barriers to moose crossings.As discussed earlier,the railway may interfere with movements of moose during the winter and early spri ng peri ods when snow embankments may either block movements by moose or trap animals within the cleared right-of-way. Cari bou The access road between the Den ali Hi ghway and the two dam sites is likely to have a substantial effect on caribou movements.Few caribou movements have been recorded in the area traversed by the Devi 1 Canyon to Watana Dam segment, and thus the northern segment between the two dams and Gold Creek should not pose a serious problem to caribou.The E-3-353 segment between the Denal i Hi ghway and Watana Dam,however, traverses an historically-important area of the herd's range,which is currently used by a resident subherd of up to 2500 caribou and also by some caribou from the main herd.The road is most likely to affect the herd by increasing mortality from collisions with vehicles and from hunting,and by altering movements between the area west of the road and the remainder of the herd1s range.There may also be a slight increase in wolf predation in the area, since wolves often use roads to their advantage while hunt- ing caribou (e.g.,Roby 1978). The most det ai 1ed i nformat i on on the effects of roads and associ ated human activities (e.g.,vehicle traffic,con- struction activity,presence of workers)on caribou comes primarily from four sources:(1)studies by the Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game (ADF&G)along the Trans-Al aska Pipeline (TAPS)corridor since 1974,and along the Kuparuk oi lfi e ld access road si nce 1978;(2)a two-year study by Fancy (in press)in a floodplain area used by large numbers of caribou moving to and from insect-relief areas;(3)data from a study by Roby (1978),who worked with ADF&G along the TAPS corridor;and (4)a two-year study conducted along the Kuparuk Oilfield access road by Curatolo et al.(1982). Alyeska Pipeline Service Company is also funding a three- year study along the TAPS corridor as a lisecond opinion li to t~e ADF&G studies;however,no reports have been released after two years of stUdy.All of these studies involve the Central Arctic Herd on Alaska1s North Slope. The results of these studi es are somewhat contradi ctory, and as a result,caribou biologists disagree on the sever- ity of road effects on caribou.ADF&G studies (Cameron and Whitten 1979,1980;Cameron et al.1979)have concluded that caribou cows and calves avoid the Prudhoe Bay oi 1- field,based on·a lower percentage of calves in caribou groups observed from the roads in their study area as com- pared to aerial sightings over a larger area.However,the calf percentage may sometimes vary independently of human developments and activities (Fancy,in press),and differ- ent habitat preferences and the latitudinal segregation of bull and cow groups makes it diffi cul t to interpret d i ffer- ences in the calf percentage over a 1arge stUdy area. Along the Kuparuk oilfield access road (oriented E-W and thus not confused by latitudinal biases),calf percentages have not been found to differ from those expected in three years of study (Cameron et al.1981).During an aeri al calving survey along that road in 1980,no calves were seen with;n 4 km ei ther s ide of the road,but thi s was not the case in 1978 and 1979.Few calves have been born within the Prudhoe Bay complex in recent years;however,equally E-3-354 ,~ ~, -~ - ~I - ,~ low numbers of neonatal calves are sighted between the Sagavanirktok and Shaviovik Rivers (east of the onfield), where no roads or other developments occur.The Central Arctic Herd has been steadily increasing in size each year, and productivity has been "excellent"(Cameron et ale 1981),in spite of the localized effects on caribou distri- bution and group composition. Recent detailed studies involving continuous observations of caribou as they approach roads and pipelines have found that most cari bou will cross roads wi th 1i ght to moderate vehicle traffic,but that caribou will often first try to find a way around the obstacle (paralleling movements),and some groups (10-14%for the most detailed study)may refuse to cross at all (Fancy,in press).Preliminary results by Curatolo et ale (1982)have found that the proportion of groups that crossed the Kuparuk oilfield road and pipeline was significantly less than that expected (control).Many groups left their study area paralleling the road and pipe- 1ine,and thus the proportion of groups that eventually crossed could not be determined. The responses of individual caribou to roads and traffic are extremely variable;some animals appear to avoid light- ly travelled roads entirely,whereas others will cross roads during rates of traffic exceeding one vehicle per m-j nutewith no observable response.In general,however, moving vehicles and/or the presence of workers will alter the local movements and behavior of caribou.Horejsi (1981)reported that 88%of the caribou he observed along the Dempster Hi ghway reacted to a movi ng pickup truck by running or trotting away.A fleeing animal can expend eight to twenty times the cost of basal metabolism,at the expense of body growth,.development,and reproduction (Geist 1975). The greatest concern for di sturbance effects on caribou is for cows in late pregnancy and cows with young calves. Femal e cari bou are particul arly sensi ti ve to di sturbances during thi calving period (Lent 1966,Bergerud 1974,Calef et ale 1976,Surrendi and DeBock 1976),and disturbances at this time are more likely to result in lowered recruitment because of premature travel by calves,disruption of cowl calf bonds,or trampling (Lent 1966,Geist 1971,Bergerud 1974,Surrendi and DeBock 1976).Some calving has been documented north of the Susitna Ri ver,but the road has been realigned so that it is to the west of the areas where .most calving has recently occurred.Cows calving in the area may avoid the road during the period of heavy use,but this should not affect herd productivity. E-3-355 About 20-30 truck tri ps .per day are schedul ed duri ng the construction period for the Watana dam.The frequency of all traffic (scheduled and unscheduled)is not known,but sever a 1 t ri ps per hour are 1i ke 1y.If the road is opened to the public during or after construction,.even higher traffic rates are likely.Some caribou will cross the road regard 1ess of hi gh traffi c frequenci es,but the majority would probably cross only if lulls in traffic were provi- ded.5i nce the area west of the road is current ly a peri- pheral part of the herd's range,failure of some animals to cross the road should not cause a major impact to the herd. If the herd management plan is revised to allow a large increase in the herd size,however,the importance of the area to the herd will greatly increase.It is thus impor- t ant to desi gn and operate the road so as to permit free crossings by caribou during the operation phase of the pro- ject. The physical presence of a raised gravel road,.in the ab- sence of vehicles and human activities,would not be an in- surmountable barrier to caribou movements (e.g.,Surrendi and DeBock 1976).The exception to this is that plowed or blown snow along the road could,·in combination with the raised road surface,act as a physical barrier to caribou movements (5urrendi and DeBock 1976).Caribou tend to select the lowest berms when crossing roads (Cameron and Whi tten 1976;5urrendi and DeBock 1976;Roby 1978),and various studies have shown that caribou are wary of berms they cannot see over (e.g.,Hanson 1981).It is thus important to keep berm heights as low as possible and to utilize an inobtrusive design which makes the road less conspicuous in areas of heavy caribou use. The Nelchina herd has been important to both sport and subsistence hunters because of its size and proximity to population centers.In 1981,6,662 people applied for 1,600 permits to hunt.for Nelchina caribou.The permit system currently in use will have to be continued if only the annual increment is to be harvested as stated in the herd management plan (ADF&G 1976).Public access provided by the Denal i access road wi 11 have a greater effect on the distribution of hunting pressure than it will on the actual number of cari bou harvested,since hunter success is cur- rently very high.The Susitna-Nenana subherd is resident in the access road area and,although the rate of exchange of individuals with the main herd is unknown,the presence of the Watana impoundment in conjunction with heavy hunting pressure will probably result in a substantial decrease in this subherd. E-3-356 - ,~ - .- - "".• (ii i)Dall Sheep The effect of vehicle traffic along the access road should be insignificant since sheep are not expected to occur close to the roads.MacArthur et al.(1982)found that only 19 of 215 documented passes (8.8%)of sheep by vehicles evoked heart rate responses,usually of low ampli. tude.Moreover,73.7%of all heart rate responses occurred when vehicles passed within 25 m of the sheep.They re- ported that only 2 of the 215 vehicle·passes (0.9%)they recorded evoked withdrawal responses by sheep.In Denali Nat ional Park,Tracy (1977)found that the strength of reactions and the percentage of sheep showing visible reac- tions to buses and visitors decreased with increasing dis- t ances between the sheep and the road.She recorded no reactions by sheep at distances exceeding 750 rn from the road,whereas strong reactions were only recorded at dis- ta,nces less than 400 m.Dall sheep have continued to use lambing and wintering areas along the Dalton Highway (Hemmi ng and Morehouse 1976;Fancy 1980),in spite of i n- tensive pipeline construction and vehicle traffic along that road. ...- - - If the project area is opened to the public following con- struction,there will likely be an increase in hunting pressure in locations adjacent to the access roads and the reservoir.The number of sheep harvested i nthe area is not expected to greatly increase,however,because all or most legal rams in the area are already being harvested each year.Serious population depletions resulting from the increased hunting pressure are thus not expected to occur. (iv)Brown Bears Both the Denal i-Watana and Watana-Devil Canyon access road segments traverse prime brown bear habitat.Potential im- pacts of the access roads on brown bears include inter- ference with movements,increased hunting mortality,a decrease in acceptable denning and feeding areas,and direct mortalities from collisions with vehicles.Direct mortality from hunting will probably have the greatest effect on the population in the long-term. Tracy (l977)reported on the reactions of brown bears to the Denali Park road.She found that the densities of bears in stUdy plots away from the road were consistently greater than densities along the road,suggesting an avoid- ance of roads by bears even where no hunting occurs.Many bears have habituated to the road,however,and those seen near the road were frequently engaged in such activities as nursing,playing,and sleeping,whIch suggest security and E-3-357 relaxation.The literature also includes a paper by Elgmork (1976),who reported that construction of a network of logging roads in Norway resulted in a lower density of brown bears,and a report by Mi ller and Ballard (1982)on the apparent short-term deflection of brown bear movements by the Glenn Highway in Alaska. The access road is likely to cause some alterations in the movements of brown bears,but there is little evidence to suggest that it wi 11 block bear movements altogether.How- ever,because brown bears in the upper basi n are hunted, they are not likely to feed on berries and other foods occurri ng adj acent to the road,and thus there wi 11 be a decrease in the avai 1abi lity of foods as a result of the road.It is also likely that brown bears will find the denning area used by three different bears in 1980 and 1981 near the proposed road unacceptable once the road is pre- sent.However,acceptable denning areas appear to be wide- ly available in the upper basin,and the loss of areas near the road would be serious only if bears already in their dens abandoned them during road construction. Although some brown bears are now harvested from the remote areas of the upper basin,most hunting occurs along or near the Denali Hi ghway.The improved access resulti ng from the road and reservoir will probably cause a large increase in the number of brown bears killed by hunters in the basin. (v)Black Bears The access road will impact black bears primarily through i mprovedaccess for hunters.81 ack bears do not usua 11 y occur·near the proposed road north·of the Deadman Lake area,and much of the Watana-Devi 1 Canyon segment is at elevations above acceptable black bear habitat.Road con- struction could cause abandonment of dens,particularly in the lower Deadman Creek area and near the Dev;1 Canyon dam- site.The probability of bear mortalities due to collis- ions with vehicles is low. (vi)Wolf The major effect of the access route on wolves will be an increase in the numbers of hunters,trappers and construc- t i on workers ab 1e to shoot wo 1ves in the area.However, wolves may also be affected by disturbance from construc- tion activities and traffic,and small numbers may be killed by vehicles.The numbers killed by vehicles is likely to be greater if wolves become habituated to vehicles through being fed.Since wolves do habituate readily to traffic and noise under most circumstances,dis- turbance is unlikely to have major effects.However, E-3-358 - ~, - ,... - - - ...... I , wo 1ves appear to be more sensiti ve to di sturbance duri ng the denning season.Carbyn (1964)documented abandonment of two wolf dens near highways after the roads were up- ,graded and traffi c vo 1umes increased.Th e proposed Susitna access route passes through the home ranges of at 1east three wo lf packs.Two den sites and one rendezvous si te are known from the general vicinity of the access route. Additional sites most likely exist and should be identified before the access route is finalized. Impacts from increased access by hunters and trappers can- not be quantified but may be severe.As many as 8-10 wolves per year have been taken in the immediate vicinity of the proposed impoundments since 1976-77 (Ballard et al. 1982)in spite of the relative inaccessibility of the area at present.Increases in the number taken may be beyond the capability of the population to replace t or may reduce theabi lity of this population to produce excess animals that presently disperse to areas even more heavily hunted. (vii)'Wolverine The direct loss of habitat due to the access road will have an insignificant effect on wolverine.Hornocker and Hash1s (1981)statement that lithe si ze and shape of (wo lveri ne home)ranges were not affected byrivers t reservoirs,high- ways or mountain ranges"suggests that the road and associ- ated traffic wi 11 also have an insignificant effect on wolverine movements and availability of prey.It is not clear if wolverine will utilize carcasses of animals killed by collisions with vehicles t but this is a possibility, especially during periods of infrequent vehicle use.The potential for wolverines to be killed by vehicles is very low,considering the low densities of wolverine and their wariness. Increases in trapping pressure as a result of improved .access is more likely to affect wolverines than any other project-related activity.Wolverines are highly suscept- ible to trapping because they travel widely and are readily attracted to baits.Hornocker and Hash (1981)reported that all of the wolverines they captured were missing one or more toes t and many had broken teeth;many of these mutilations were attributed to encounters with leg-hold traps.Van Zyll de Jong (1975)stated that "predation by humans appears to be the most likely factor to have affect- ed the number of wo 1veri nes.Oi rect evi dence of negati ve effects of human exploitation on wolverine populations is not available,but indirect evidence from declining produc- tion of wolverine pelts and the disappearance of the spe- cies from areas with relatively dense human populations strongly suggests that exploitation by man contri buted to £-3-359 the decline.1I Fifteen of the 18 known wolverine mortali- ties in Hornocker and Hash1s (1981)study were human caused.Increased trappi ng pressure in the Susitna basi n will probably cause some instability in the social struc- ture of the population,thus causing noticeable shifts in home ranges.However,effects of trapping mortality would be offset somewhat by emigration of wolverine from the large parcels of wolverine habitat surrounding the basin into the affected areas. Wilderness or remote country where human activity is lim- ited appears essential to the maintenance of viable wolver- ine populations (Van Zyll de Jong 1975,Hornocker and Hash 1981).However,Hornocker and Hash (1981)reported that they found II no differences in wolverine density between the wilderness and nonwi lderness port ions of our study area, nor was wolverine movement,habitat use,and behavior dif- ferent.Marked wolverines used both areas and several in- dividuals l home areas overlapped both wilderness and non- wilderness.The nonwilderness portion,about one-half of the study area,is used by humans primarily for logging and recreation.logging roads and foot trails provide access to river and stream bottoms and lower elevations during summer and fall months.Loggers,summer recreationists, and hunters make consi derabl e use of those areas.II·They went on to say,however,that wolverines and humans were effectively separated because the wolverines were at higher e 1ev at ions away from peop 1e d uri ng summer and fall,and little use of the area by humans occurs during winter when wolverines move to the lower elevations.A similar situa- tion will exist in the upper Susitna basin;the most inten- si ve human use of the area wi 11 occur in summer when wo 1- veri nes are usi ng primarily tundra habi tats.Wi nter use of the impoundment areas,except for trapping,should be con- siderablyless than that during snow-free periods. (viii)Furbearers The construct i on of the two access roads and the rai lway wi 11 result in some habitat loss for terrestri al fur- bearers,and may result in habitat loss for aquatic fur- bearers if wetlands are degraded.Minor effects on the local distribution of some species may also occur along the road.For example,Hawley and Newby (1957)believed that habitat openings were a psychological barrier to marten. Although subsequent studies have found that marten regular- ly cross openings 100 to 200 m wide (Koehler et al.1975, Soutiere 1978),the actess route may result in a redistri- bution of home ranges such that they are aligned with the road. E-3-360 - ,~ - ~, .- - - Similarly,some foxes may avoid the r~ad area but most will probably habituate to traffic.Tracy (1977)found several fox dens within 100 m of the road in Denali National Park and observed foxes traveling along the road while vehicles were using it.However,such habituation to human presence probably occurs only in the absence of trapping pressure. Access to the Watana site from the Denali Highway has the potenti al to negatively impact large numbers of beaver. Approximately 65 beaver occupy 18.4 km of upper Deadmen Creek,a relatively broad stretch along which the access route is proposed.Similar beaver densities may occur in adjacent areas designated as materi al sites.Use of the valley bottom for the road and materi al sites wi 11 nega- tively impact at least 40 beavers. Two opposing scenarios are reported in the 1i terature on possi b1e effects of road construction on beaver habitat. In one (Watson et a 1.1973),di versi on or impoundment of stream and subsurface water flows by road berms has a nega- t i 'Ie effect on downstream beaver ponds and 1akes through the introduction·of heavy sediment loads and increased turbidity.These are the effects of bank i nstabi 1ity caused by the clearing of riparian vegetation associated with ri ghts-of-way construct ion and mai ntenance.Heavy sediment loads result in the gradual filling of down-stream ponds and 1akes;i ncreased turbidity reduces light penetra- tion and inhibits growth of aquatic vegetation. Alternatively,ponding at culverts and bridges and restric- ted subsurface flows caused by road berms has often created attractive sites for beaver colonization.The use of bri- dges and culverts as dam sites by beaver is well documented (Bradt 1947,Hodgdon and Hunt 1953,Huey 1956,Longley and Moyle 1963,Rutherford 1964,Johnson and Gunson 1976). However,habitat improvement through the introduction of a road in beaver habitat along upper Deadman Creek is unlikely and a reduction in beaver numbers is expected there. Muskrat along the proposed access routes wi 11 be impacted through habltat loss and increased trapping mortality. Gipsonet ala (1982)found sign of over-wintering muskrat in several of the lakes lying along the proposed route from Watana Dam to Devi 1 Canyon Dam.Many of these muskrat occur in conjunct i on with the high beaver densities noted along the proposed route from the Denali Highway to Watana Dam. E-3-361 In addition to being very sensitive to water level changes which could occur due to draining or filling of ponds and 1 akes (Bellrose and Brown 194·1),or den (MacArthur 1978). The small foraging area of muskrat,usually within 10 m of their house,makes them sensitive to loss of their pre- ferred foods of aquatic and emergent plants (Butler 1940). Nosubstanti a1 effects are anti ci pated on mi nk or otter populations with the possible exception of increased public access to streams that may be important to these speci es. Present information is insufficient to address these site- specifi c concerns but surveys duri ng wi nter 1981 suggest that both mink and otter are primarily restricted to the mainstream of the Susitna River which is some distance from the access roads.The railway could potentially interfere with some areas of good mink and otter habitat. The major impact of the access routes on fur bearers is re- lated to the probable increase in trapping pressure.The Susitna Basin is not heavily trapped at present and,for some species,the area may be a source from which animals di sperse into more heavily trapped adjacent areas.The speci es that wi 11 be most affected by increased trappi ng pressure are probably marten,beaver ,muskrat,and red fox. Marten are the most economically important furbearer in the basin;beavers and foxes are also heavily exploited in adjacent areas.Mink and otter may be affected to a lesser extent since they do not appear to be particularly desir- able species in this part of Alaska (Gipson et a1.1982). (ix)Raptors and Ravens -Denali Highway to Watana Dam Site Some nesting habitat for ground-nesting raptors (e.g., mer1ins,northern harriers,short-eared owls)may occur along the Denali -Watana sect i on of the access road and may be lost;however,cliff-nesting habitat does not appear to occur within at least a few kilometers of the route,and only one tree-nest appears to be associ ated with it (Roseneau,pers.comm.). No golden eagles,gyrfalcon,goshawk,or raven nesting locations will be lost as a result of road construction between the Denali Hi ghway and the Watana Camp Si te - Watana Dam Site. E-3-362 ... _. ~ I - - - - ..., .... ,~ 1 One bald eagle nesting location (BE-6,see Table E.3.W76) in Deadman Creek will be physically destroyed by access road construction between the Denali Highway and the Watana dam site unless specific protective actions (e.g., realigning the access road westward)are taken.The active nest is located in a balsam poplar tree in a small stand of poplar and white spruce.The current road alignment passes directly through the stand of trees. This stand appears to be the best (and possibly only) potential bald eagle nest-ing habitat along Deadman Creek. ·Disturbance Two nesting locations,one golden eagle (GE-18)and one of raven (R-21)may be suscept i b 1e to·disturbance from the Watana-Devil Canyon section of the access road. Both are near the western end of the road,withi n about 0.2 km of the centerline (see Table E.3.W76).Further- more,a bridge will be built across the river about 0.9 km downstream of the golden eagle location;the activ- ity during construction may result in temporary aban- dondment of this site. -Devil Canyon Dam Site to Gold Creek ·Habitat Loss Some nesting habitat for ground and tree-nesting rap- tors may occur along the proposed railroad access route from Devil Canyon to Gold Creek;however,no known nesting locations will be lost.No known cliff-nesting locations occur in this section of the access road. ·Disturbance The proposed rai 1road 1i nk between Devi 1 Canyon and Gold Creek will pass about 0.5 km southeast across the river from one bald eagle location (BE-8,see Table E.3.W76).Disturbance is likely to be minimal. E-3-363 (x)Waterbirds and Other Birds Impacts of access roads on birds result from habitat loss and alteration,disturbance from traffic and people associ~ ated with the project,direct mortality from both collis- ions with vehi~les and increased hunting pressure,and i ndi reet effects on nest i ng success because of increased recreational use.The most significant of these impacts vary with species group (Table E.3.W79),but for most species,none will be as serious as the impacts resulting from the flooding of the impoundments. An estimated 1710 to 2607 pairs of breeding birds will be lost from the local population due to habitat loss from construction of the access road (Table E.3.W79).The access road wi 11 cause the loss of more than 1%of the estimated upper Susitna population of only three species: spruce grouse,brown creeper,and northern waterthrush (T ab 1e E.3•W80). Habitat alteration will include some opening of the canopy where the road passes through closed forest and shrub1 and and,as pointed out in Section 4.3 (a),(xvi),this may result in a change in species composition of breeding birds.In at least one instance (Jeglum 1975),building of a road that blocked drai nage through a portion of the boreal forest has been shown to improve habitat for some waterbi rds. Effects of disturbances from road traffic will probably be minor for most species but there are few quantitative data to support this argument.In one of the few quantitative studies of disturbance to songbirds,Ferris (1979)reported no differences in breeding bird densities adjacent and di stant from 4-1 ane and 2-1 ane hi ghways in Mai ne."He di d find a small difference in species composition which was ascribed to edge effects adjacent to the highway. Some speci es of low open habitats may be more affected. Van der Zande et a 1.(1980)found that two and passi b ly three of the four shorebird species they studied nested at lower densi ties up to at 1east 1 km from both busy and relatively quiet roads.In some cases,nesting density was reduced by 60%.Quantitative studies of species nesting in open habitats in Alaska are not available,but similar effects could occur with ptarmigan,some shorebird species, and some passerine species. E-3-364 - tlIIlPi1I! - Ji'!M!ll!!: - - - ~ I (x i) Some birds wi 11 undoubtedly be ki lled by road traffic. Species such as spruce grouse will be attracted to the road as a source of gravel (Carbyn 1968),whereas scavengers, including ravens and possibly eagles,will be attracted by road killed wildlife.However,mortality from collisions will probably have a lesser effect on game birds than will increased hunt i ng pressure.Th e Upper Susitna Basi n is· relatively inaccessible at present and it is likely that little game bird hunting occurs there.When road access is provided,hunting will undoubtedly increase and wi 11 pro- bably be concentrated along the road.Weeden (1972)found that hunters kill ed a much 1arger proport i on of pt armi g an within 800 m of the Steese Highway than further away.The same would likely be true for other game birds. Increased recreational use or human disturbance in wilder- ness areas in other parts of North America has been associ- ated with various behavioral effects,and in some cases in reduced nest i ng success.Loons and grebes appear to be particularly affected by boating activity.Nesting success in both groups has been shown to decrease with increasing presence of boats and canoes (Ream 1976,Euler 1978, McIntyre 1978).Power boats may also destroy loon nests through wave action (Vermeer 1973). Recreational activities,particularly in open habitats,may result in nest destruct i on by predators after i ncubat i ng adults are flushed.This has been documented for at least two duck speci es and the Canada goose (Hammond and Forward 1956,MacInnes and Misra 1972).Presumably,simi lar nest losses cou1 d occur in up 1and tundra speci es fl ushed from their nests by all-terrain vehicles or other recreational activities. Non-Game (sma 11)Mammals The proposed access roads to the Susitna Dams wi 11 traverse a wide variety of small mammal habitats,but will mostly be in tundra.Although all species of small mammals are ex- pected to be affected to some extent,only the species most affected (those living in tundra habitats)will be dis- cussed below.Impacts include increased mortality,impeded dispersal,presence of new habitats,and changes in drain- age patterns. In areas of moi st tundra,the gravel berm that wi 11 consti- tute the road bed will act as a barrier to dispersal of small mammals.Traffic on the road will cause increased mortality in'local populations.However,no serious changes in regional population sizes or structures are expected. E-3-365 The well-drained gravel of the road bed will provide ideal burrow sites for arctic ground squirrels and singing voles. Hoary marmots may also use the coarser gravel section of the road bed for den sites.The well-drained vegetative communit i es created on the edges of the grave 1 berm may also be colonized by meadow voles and some species of shrews. Portions of the road wi 11 1ikely cause subtle changes in drainage patterns in lateral areas which in turn may result in alterations to vegetation.The types of vegetation that become est ab 1i shed wi 11 depend on whether water 1eve 1s i n- crease or decrease as a result of the road.Species compo- sition of small mammals in these areas will shift accord- ingly,with brown lemmings,bog lemmings,and tundra voles preferring the wetter areas,and red-backed voles,singing voles,and shrews attracted to the well-drained areas. (d)Transmission Lines The construction and operation of the transmission lines associ- ated with the project will impact a wide variety of wildlife.The four segments of transmission lines --Cook Inlet to Willow,Healy to Fai rbanks,Wi llow to Healy (the Interti e),and Watana to the Intertie --extend over 700 km,traversing habitats ranging from closed forests to tundra (see Table E.3.W29).Several types of impacts can'be expected,including habitat alterations,distur- bance during construction,direct impacts due to the presence of the transmission lines,and indirect impacts due to improved access. (i)Bi 9 Game -Cook Inlet to Willow The southernmost segment of the transmi ssi on corri dor, from Cook Inlet to Willow,traverses mostly forest vege- tation types.The most common community types are closed and open mi xed forest and closed bi rch forest.The bi g game species that are most likely to be affected by the c1eari ng of these forest types are moose and black bears. Both of these species utilize browse in early to mid- successional stands,and would likely benefit from the vegetative communities present in the transmission corri- dor after clearing (Scotter 1970,Lindzey and Meslow 1977).There is little data quantifying the effects of such clearings in terms of population productivity,but the general conclusion is that transmission line clearing shoul d increase carryi ng capaci ty for moose and black bears (Sopuck et al.1979). E-3-366 - -, - - .... """" .... _. - The disturbances due to human activities during construc- tion will be temporary effects.Most big game animals will relocate during the construction phase,but are expected to return once construction is completed (Commonwealth et a1.1982).Serious impacts are expected only if clearing and construction occur near moose calv- i ng grounds or bear denni ng sites.Di sturbance of ani- mals at such sites could cause decreases in productivity. The increase in human activity in the area between Wi llow-Cook Inlet during the construction of the trans- mission line is unlikely to affect regional distribution of big game species.This area is already subject to high levels of human activity.The most abundant big game species --moose and black bear --are fairly toler- ant of human disturbance;those species easi ly disturbed (i .e.,wolf,wolverine,brown bear)are already rare in the area. -Healy to Fairbanks The transmission line right-of-way in this area will traverse mostly open spruce forests,along with mixed low shrub,open mixed forest,and open deciduous forest.In all cases,community types that will be affected by clearing .operations are widespread and abundant in the area .. Impacts are expected to be similar to those discussed in the Cook Inlet to Willow section (above).Most of the direct impacts Will occur during the construction period, when disturbance will cause big game species to relocate. After construction,moose and bears are expected to bene- fit from the early successional communities along the corri dor. -Willow to Healy The transmission corridor from Willow to Healy (the Interti e)wi 11 have to be upgraded to accommodate the power from the Susitna project.Most of the intertie is located in forest types:bottomland lowland,and upland spruce-hardwood forests (Commonwealth et al.1982). The additional clearing required will affect local popu- lations of moose,caribou,Dall sheep,brown bears,and black bears.Animals that relocate due to disturbance from construction activities can be expected to return. Most of the major impacts associ ated with transmi ssi on corridors (discussed in the proceeding sections)will already be effective due to the existence of the inter- tie.Thus,the modification required for the Susitna project ar.enot expected to increase access,hunting,or long-term human disturbance levels. E-3-367 -Watana Dam to the Intertie The transmission corridor fromWatana Dam to the Intertie traverses mixed spruce-hardwood forests and brush commu- nities~paralleling the road and railroad access routes. Clearing required in forested areas will probably have a beneficial effect on black bear and moose. (i i)Furbearers Furbearers will be'impacted by construction of transmission lines due to habitat alteration and increased trapping pressure resulting from improved access.Denver (1976) found that most furbearers avoided cleared or disturbed areas.Although it has been shown that clear cut areas are not a barrier to travel by short-tailed weasel~least weasel~mink~marten~or other mustelids~cleared areas are usually not used for hunting (Soutiere 1978).Forested areas offer better sub-nivian hunting conditions because the bases of trees~logs~and windfalls provide numerous entry points (Koehler et al.1975). Foxes and coyotes are sometimes attracted to cleared areas as movement corridors (Penner 1976).Both foxes and coyotes may benefit from the removal of forest vegetation since they feed heavily on microtine rodents.. Transmission lines will increase access for trappers and could result in local population reductions of some fur- bearers,particularly in presently remote areas.Marten and beaver will probably suffer the greatest impact since they are currently the target of most trapper effort. The impact of trapping on coyote~red fox,and lynx wi 11 probably be less severe since they are wider ranging than the smaller mustelids.Least weasels,short-tailed weasels,and mink have historically received little trap- ping pressure. (i i i)Bi rds The construction and operation of the transmission corri- dors will affect birds mostly as a result of changes in vegetation height~disturbance during initial construction~ and the electrocution or collision mortality of some birds from the wi res.Si nce much of the transmi ssi on corridor passes through forest~sel ecti ve cl eari ng of trees may result in an increase in species diversity near the lines. E-3-368 "..., - (i v) Only one known raptor nest occurs near the proposed trans- mission route,but this nest is of special concern because it was once occupied by the endangered peregrine falcon. The nest occurs along the Tanana River on the east side of the corridor between Healy and Fairbanks.This nest was first discovered around 1967,but has not been used since the mi d-70 IS (Roseneau,pers.comm.).Whether or not it wi 11 be used again is unknown.If the nest is active dur- ing the construction of the line,the birds may abandon it as a resul t of the di sturbance.If the nest remai ns inactive during line construction,however,it will most likely be acceptable for later use during the operational phase of the line.If necessary,the transmission line in this area could be constructed during a time period that would.reduce the l'ikelihood of disturbing nesting pere- grines.Furthermore,a Section 7 consultation,as required by the Endangered Speci es Act,wi 11 be conducted wi th the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service to help insure that the peregrine nest is not impacted. Minimal disturbance of raptors and ravens in the study area is anticipated as a result of the winter construction of the high voltage transmission lines.Two gyrfalcon nesting locations (GYR-2 and GYR-3)are within 0.6 km of the trans- mi ssi on corri dor.Gyrf a1cons may be suscept i b1e to some impact as a result of disturbance from winter construction activities because adults are known to frequent eyries throughout the winter months (see Roseneau et al.1981). Birds of prey and swans (Harrison 1963)are susceptible to electrocution as a result of perching on the structures. Electrocution is probably the greatest potential impact of the power lines on both raptors and ravens.Larger size is the greatest factor affecting species vulnerability to electrocution (Olendorff et al.1981).Consequently, golden.and bald eagles are the most susceptible of the raptors inhabiting the area being considered.In addition, immature or subadult eagles are more susceptible to elec- trocution than adults.Buteos (e.g.,red-tai led hawk and rough-legged hawk)are also vulnerable,but accipiters (e.g.,goshawk and sharp-skinned hawks)and even the larger falcons (e.g.,peregrines and gyrfalcons)are rarely electrocuted (Olendorff et al.1981). Non-G ame (small )Mammal s The transmission lines for the Susitna project will traverse a wide variety of small mammal habitats.These transmission corridors will be selectively cleared of trees and tall shrubs.Because most small mammals are ecotone species,they are expected to benefit from the edge [-3-369 effects created by the clearings.One example is the snow- shoe hare,which relies on dense black spruce forests for cover,but prefers more open areas for forage (Kessel et ale 1982).Overall,transmission corridors are not expec- ted to adversely impact small mammals. (e)Impact Summary This section summarizes those impacts on wildlife populations pre- dicted to be of sufficient magnitude to influence mitigation plan- ning.The emphasis is on impacts to wildlife population levels; both positive and negative impacts are discussed. Whether impacts to wildlife are Judged to be positive or negative depends on the perspective of judgment.For example,increased access by hunters and trappers usually depresses population levels of big game species and furbearers.But at the same time,in- creased access has the potential to increase the long-term yield and value of this wildlife to consumptive users. Herein we address impacts only from the perspective of the wild- life populations per see An increase in wildlife abundance or production is a positive impact;a decrease in wildlife abundance or production is a negative impact.Project actions known or speculated to cause measurable changes in project area wildlife population or production levels are discussed,but those actions thought to cause negligible or no changes are not. (i)Big Game The big game populations expected to be affected by the Susitna project are moose,black bear,brown bear,wolf, wolverine,Dall sheep,and caribou.The main influence on these species will be through habitat loss by inundation, increased necessity for killing nuisance animals,increased access afforded to hunters,and/or possibly by blockage of migration routes by roads or reservoirs. The greatest impact on moose will probably be caused by loss of winter habitat inundated by impoundments.Poten- tially critical winter habitat for a substantial number of moose (approximately 260 inmost years)wi 11 be inundated by Watana;a smaller amount of winter habitat (used by about 30 moose inmost years)wi 11 be lost to the Devi 1 Canyon reservoir. We judge the next most important effect on moose to be a decrease in popul at ions caused by greater ease of hunter access.Changes in vegetation downstream of reservoirs may have a small population-level effect.Other actions are not thought likely to have important effects. E-3-370 "".. - -. - - Major impacts on caribou are not predicted.Minor popula- tion changes caused by increased hunter access,blockage of the movements of some cari bou by access roads and the Watana impoundment,and some mortality during crossings of the impoundment area at certain times of the year are possible. Da11 sheep may abandon the Jay Creek lick area as a of frequent human disturbances or partial inundation 1 ick.The population impact of this is uncertain. increases in mortal ity caused by greater ease of access are not expected. result of the Large hunter (i i) B1 ack bears and brown bears are most 1 ikely to suffer from increased hunter access,from nui sance ani mal control measures,from inundation of portions of habitat,and from reductions in salmon available at traditional feeding sites.Black bears in the area will loose a substantial porti on of their forest habitat,inc1 udi ng a 1arge propor- t ion of den sites in the Watana impoundment area.These losses are likely to cause a large reduction in the black bear population now occurring in the Watana vicinity. Brown bears will lose important early-spring feeding areas to i nundati on.Both bl ack and brown bears may lose some of their salmon food supply.Other impacts are not 1 ikely to cause significant population changes. Wolves typically suffer most fromi ncreased access by con- struction workers and hunters.Large population reductions by hunter harvest are expected.They are probably i nsensi- tive to most other changes. Wolverine populations may decline because of increased trapping pressures,but probably not for other reasons. Furbearers All upland fur bearer populations are expected to decline for two main reasons--inundation of portions of their habi- tats by impoundments,and increased trappi ng pressure caused by easier trapper access.Red faxes may addition- ally be removed as nuisance animals,but the proportion of the population in the Susitna Basin affected by such removal will probably be small. Impacts to aquatic furbearers are not clear.Populations of beaver,muskrat,and possibly mink and otters may increase downstream of the reservoir because of more stable water levels,higher winter flows,increased availability of favored food plants,and the lack of an ice-cover in wi nter.Impoundments will inundate streamsi de habitats of mi nk and otter and others in the upper basi n,but whether substantial populations exist there now is uncertain,and E-3-371 whether the Watana impoundment itself is inhabitable by these species is uncertain.The stable water level in the Devil Canyon reservoir during most of the year will prob- ably have beneficial effects on aquatic furbearer species. The impoundment areas presently support only a few muskrat and beaver.In the upper basin,these species wi 11 be most affected by removal of road materials from streams and increased trapper access. (iii)Birds The major impact to upland bird species will be inundation of habitat in the reservoir area.Changes in bird commun- ity composition wi 11 probab 1y occur wherever veget at ion community changes are expected (e.g.,downstream riparian, construction and borrow sites,etc.)but these changes will be localized and/or relatively insignificant to bird den- sity and diversity. Inundation of stream habitats by impoundments wi 11 remove some nesting waterfowl (mergansers),and may cover wi nter habitat for dippers,but these impacts are considered minor.Moreover,downstream habitats may improve for some of these species (i.e.,wintering dippers). (i v)Non-Game Mammals The major expected impact of the Susitna project on non- game mammals will be via habitat loss in the impoundment areas.Effects of other changes·on population levels in the project area will almost certainly be minimal. E-3-372 - - - - - - ...... -- (i)Moose Di rect impacts to moose resulti ng from the Susitna Hydro- electric Project will be,in order of decreasing severity, permanent loss of habitat,alteration of habitat,blockage of traditional migration routes,disturbance by machines and humans,and hazards associ ated with theWatana and Devi 1 Canyon drawdown zones.The major secondary impact of the project will be the provision of access to a previously remote area and,without agency regulation,a significant increase in hunti ng pressure with resultant increases in moose mortai1ity. Permanent loss or alteration of habitat suitable as browse, wintering range,calving areas,and breeding areas wi 11 result from the Watana and Devil Canyon impoundments. Habitat loss cannot be avoided,minimized,rectified,or reduced over time through management measures;yet such loss i s certain to occur •Compensation by habitat rep 1ace- ment and enhancement,therefore,must receive highest pri- ority as a strategy to mitigate this impact. Computer-assisted simulation modeling is being used to help quantify the probable impact of habitat loss at the popula- tion level,and to help develop criteria for the selection of repl acement 1ands for habitat compensation and enchance- mente Leading specialists in of Alaskan moose are partici- pating in this process,and the day-to-day management and refi nementof the moose model i s being conducted by the A1 aska Department of Fi sh and Game (ESSA/WELUT!LGL 1982). The modeling program is the focus for interagency coordina- tion to identify replacement lands and procedures for habitat enhancement . .The provision of winter and early spring browse is the pri- mary objective of replacement and enhancement planning, because impoundment will remove low-elevation areas with early-stage riparian vegetation accessible to moose in severe wi nters.These areas are used by moose wi th home ranges bordering the impoundment areas,and will nol onger be accessible to moose seasonally migrating into the Susitna Basin from neighboring regions. Controlled burning,clearing of merchantable timber,and mechanical crushing of vegetation are techniques under con- sideration for moose habitat enhancement.These procedures have been examined on an experimental basis during recent studi es at the Moose Research Center and Kenai Moose E-3-373 Range near Soldotna,Alaska (Regelin et al.1981;Schwartz et al.1981).The Bureau of Land Management is prepared to conduct a controlled burn in the Alphabet Hi lls area immediately east of the Susitna project area. Criteria for replacement land selection have been estab- lished,and quantification of optimum areal dimensions relative to enhancement effectiveness is in progress.Cri- teria for selection of replacement lands are defined by vegetation cover type and age,complexity of terrain,and location.It is estimated that peak browse production for moosei s reached 20 to 25 years after a fi re (Wo 1ff 1976; Wolff and Cezada 1979).Moderately complex terrain with extensive flatlands,riparian bottomlands,and gentle slopes of diverse aspect provide variation in species com- positi on and successi on rate.Habitat enhancement measures conducted on·lands within or bordering the project area wi 11 have the greatest potenti al for mitigating·impacts to moose affected by project development.Lands which satisfy all of the these criteria to varying degrees are available in and around the project area. To utilize new successional areas,moose must maintain flexibility in their seasonal and regional movement pat- terns.Such movements across the Susitna River in the vicinity of the Watana impoundment or upper Devil Canyon Reservoir would be blocked or significantly impeded.The provision of alternative moose range on both sides of the Susitna Ri ver wi 11 hel p to compensate for blockage of seas- onal movements across the river. Construction-and operation-related activities will produce a si gnifi cant potenti al for di sturbance to moose,espec- i ally where avoidance of prime range occurs.Mitigative features have been incorporated into engi neeri ng desi gn and construction planning to avoid or minimize this impact potenti al.The access route has been selected and modified specifically to avoid important moose concentration areas along Deadman Creek,upper Watana Creek,Port.age Creek,and the Indi anRi ver.The Fog Lakes area,Stephan Lake,and other moose habitat south of the Susitna River are entirely avoided. Facilities have been consolidated within two infrastruc- tures which will minimize the areal extent of disturbances associ atedwith the Watana and Devil Canyon developments. Project policies and stipulations will further minimize human disturbances.An Environmental Briefings Program is planned to familiarize project personnel with environ- mentally sensitive features and wildlife of the project .areas,federal and state regulations,agency permit E-3-374 ~I - - ,..., - .... - (i i) (iii) stipulations,and specific project policies and restric- tions regarding protection of fish,wildlife,habitat,and cultural resources.Hunting of moose and other wi 1d1ife, possession of firearms on the project location,and delib- erate attraction or harassment of wildlife by project personnel will be prohibited. Public access into the project area during operation will provide increased hunting opportunity in a previously re- mote arE~a.The Alaska Power Authority wi 11 assist the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in regulating access, restricting off-road or all-terrain vehicle use,and other measures to ensure that hunting pressure on moose is pro- perly controlled.Bag 1imits and permit systems are avai l- ab 1e resource management options to moderate hunt i ng pressure within the project area. Car;bou The primary impact issue relating to caribou is potential blockage of migratory movements by the Denali Highway-to- Watana segment of the access road.A bermed road in low terrain could impede the free passage of caribou.The effectiveness of the berm as a physical and ~isual.barrier will increase with height and steepness of the side-slopes. With steeper slopes;cleared snow alongside the road may be sufficiently deep to inhibit the ability of caribou to cross the road. The Denal i Hi ghway-to ..Watana access route has been desi gned to avoid low areas and to follow the contours of the slopes to the west of the Brushkana,Seattle,and Deadman Creek drai nages.Thi s routing wi 11 mi nimi ze bermed road con- struction.Where.berming is necessary to avoid sidehill cuts through permafrost,road profile elevations and side- slope grades wi 11 be reduced as much as load requirements wi 11 allow. Da 11 Sheep Restrictions on aircraft elevations and access will be en- forced during project construction to protect Dall sheep lambing areas.In addition,all visits to the Jay Creek mineral lick will be prohibited.Use of the mineral lick wi 11 be monitored before and duri ng i nundat i on of the Watana impoundment area,to determine whether use patterns change.Measures to expose new portions of the mineral· lick will be implemented if necessary. E-3-375 (iv)Brown and Black Bear Measures incorporated into overall engi neer i ng design and construction planning will help to minimize disturbances to bears.The access route avoids the important Prairie Creek· brown bear concentration area and stays well to the west of brown and black bear habitat on lower Deadman Creek. To minimize attraction and scavenging,with resultant ad- verse contacts between people and bears,all putrescible kitchen wastes will be stored indoors in sealed containers, and i nci nerated on the same day they are produced.Camp incinerators will be properly sized and operated by trained personnel to ensure that all putrescible wastes are com- pletely burned to mineral ash.Incinerator capacities will be specified to accommodate peak camp occupancy.There wi 11 be no open burni ng of food wastes.On ly inert,non- attractive materials will be deposited at solid waste dis- posa 1 sites.Camps wi 11 be surrounded with bear-resi st ant fencing to minimize human-bear interactions. Mitigative measures to maintain moose productivity will parti ally compensate for loss of bear habitat,both by maintaining the availability of young moose as prey,and by increasing vegetation diversity,fishery enhancement mea- sures (Exhibit E,Section 2)will help to maintain salmon availability downstream from Portage Creek. (v)Wolf Beaver and pine marten are the furbearer species judged to be of greatest importance for mitigation planning.These species are common in the project area and are sought by trappers.Beaver activity such as the damming of streams often b-enefits other aquatic furbearer species (e.g.,river otter,mink,muskrat),and beavers are also known to enhance areas for moose by cutting down 1 arge trees (often.i ncreasi ng the growth of favored browse speci es).The beaver popul at i on downstream of Devi 1 Canyon is expected to benefit from the altered flow and temperature regime, but beavers along De adman Creek and near the Dev i1 Canyon con- struction site could be adversely affected.No beaver are known to occur in the Watana or Devil Canyon impoundment areas. E-3-376 - - I~. r'"'" , - / Habi tat for approximately 126-100 marten wi 11 be lost when the Watana impoundment area is filled.An estimated 14 marten cur- rently occur in the Devil Canyon impoundment area.A few addi- tional marten wi 11 be affected by habitat loss to access roads and transmission corridors.Complete avoidance of impacts to marten can only be accomplished by selecting the no ~roject alternative. Habitat loss to the transmission corridors and access roads will be minimized by (1)aligning the access road primari 1y through tundra and low shrub cover types;(2)selectively cutting trees and tall shrubs in the transmission corridors,as opposed to total clearing;(3)constructing the transmission lines in winter in order to minimize surface disturbances;and (4)keeping the cor- ridor along the access road to a minimum in forested areas. One of the i denti fi ed impacts on marten and other furbearers is that of increased trapping mortality as a result of improved access.But note that marten are considered an important fur- bearer because of their economic value to trappers.The improved access may result ina greater sustained harvest of marten from the project area than now occurs,even though a smaller population would be supported by the area.Improved access can thus be viewed as either adverse or benefici a1 by various user groups.To insure that martens are not overharvested near the temporary and permanent worker facilities,the applicant will prohibit workers and their families from trapping or hunting while working in the project area. Impacts to beaver,river otter,and mink near the access road wi 11 be avoided or minimized by (1)prohibiting gravel extraction from Deadman Creek;and (2)minimizing the disturbance of riparian vegetation along this creek. The anticipated increase in aquatic furbearer populations down- stream of Devil Canyon will provide in-kind compensation for up- stream impacts.The beaver population will be monitored by the applicant to verify that beavers are positively affected by the project.The monitoring program will include the development and testing of a model that predicts changes in beaver populations over time as a result of different flow releases and water temperatures. Red foxes,wolves,coyotes,and possibly other furbearers may be adversely impacted if food is improperly stored and disposed of. These impacts will be avoided or minimized by (1)fencing the camp and dump;(2)incinerating garbage dai 1y to prevent scavengers from being attracted to it;(3)strictly enforcing the animal feeding regulations,and educating workers about these regula- tions;and (4)estab1ish-ing an animal control strategy,which will include one or two full-time biologists trained and equipped to deal with human/animal conflicts. E-3-377 (c)Bi rds (i)Raptors and Raven The major impacts of the Susi tna project on raptors and ravens are anticipated to be (1)loss of nesting habitat to the impoundment,borrow sites,and other f acil it i es adj a- cent to the dams,access routes,and transmission corri- dors;(2)di sturbance and/or harassment resulting from air- craft passage,construction activities,vehicular traffic, and increased human presence;(3)e1ectrocut i on and co 11 i- sions of raptors with transmission lines.These impacts will be mitigated through a number of practices including (1)construction of artificial cliff and tree nesting loca- tions near the impoundment,realignment of roads and trans- mission corridors to avoid known nesting locations of eagles nd falcons;(2)limitations on ground activities near raptor nests during sensitive time periods,and estab- lishment of minimum flight ceilings for aircraft during the nesting season;and (3)use of transmission tower designs that minimize electrocutions and encourage nesting and perchi ng bycertai n raptor speci es.An act ive monitori ng program wi 11 be undertaken to insure that these measures are successfully implemented. -Creating Artificial Cliff-Nesting Locations The concept of modifying or creating raptor nesting loca- tions on cliffs is a recent but feasible means of compen- sating for nesting habitat loss.One technique uses ex- plosives to remove overburden and rubble to expose bed- rock cliffs;small shaped explosive charges are then used to build a nesting ledge.Another possibility is to create an artificial cliff using cinder block,concrete, fiberglass and metal,or other materials (such cliffs have been constructed for rock-c 1imbi ng schools).These artificial cliffs could be placed in areas where suitable rock for nesting could not be exposed;one or two nesting ledges could even be located on the downstream face of the Watana or Devil Canyon dam. The applicant will initiate a program to mitigate for losses of cliff-nesting eagles and falcons beg'inning in 1983.Accurate elevations (present elevations are accur- ate only to within 15 m)will be obtained for nests with- in the impoundment zone and borrow sites to determine the number of nests to be lost.A survey of the upper basin by a recognized raptor biologist will be made to identify potenti al sites for cliff modifications.Because some raptors wi 11 successfully defend several a1 ternate nest si tes wi thi n an area,the newl y-created nest si tes must be widely-spaced along the impoundment. E-3-378 ..... ""'"I Several artificial cliffs may be needed in the Watana Reservoi r area,where potenti a1 new nesting 1oc at ions appear to be limited. Because all of the borrow areas may not be used,and because some nests may be destroyed by slope instability after filling,the exact number of raptor nests lost can- not yet be determined.The applicant will establish a program to (1)identify the impacts of the project during the construction,filling,and operation phases;(2) modify or create new nesting locations to compensate for these losses;and {3)monitor the success of these miti- gati ve measures.The number of new successful nesti ng sites created wi 11 match or exceed the number of si tes lost to the project. -Creating Artificial Tree-Nesting Locations It is possible to mitigate for the loss to the project of approximately 4 bald eagle nests by constructing artifi- cial nests.Bald eagles have shown little reluctance to use nests reconstructed after havi ng been down (e.g., Olendorff et al.1980).Natural-appearing nests could be constructed in appropri ate trees (especi allyl arge balsam poplar)downstream of the dam site or along tributaries such as Portage Creek (presently unused by bald eagles). The nests that will be inundated can be reconstructed in other areas.Another techni que is to remove the top and upper limbs of large balsam poplar and white spruce trees to make them more attractive to bald eagles.A combina- tion of these techniques will be used in conjunction with a monitoring program to replace the losses of bald eagle nests resulting from the project. Successful attempts to provide nests for tree-nesti ng goshawks,American kestrels,red-tailed hawks and great gray owls h ave been made (e.g.,01 endorff et a 1.1980). Nesting habitat for goshawks can be improved both by establishing artificial nests and by increasing the edge effect in 1arge forest stands (D.Wei r,pers.comm.;D. Roseneau,unpubl.data).Great horned and great gray owls commonly use abandoned goshawk nests in Alaska (Roseneau and Bente 1981),and would therefore also benefit from increased edge. Tree-nesting species will also use artificial nesting platforms constructed on transmi ssi on towers (Table E.3.W81).Selective clearing of the transmission corri- dors will serve to create the edge preferred by goshawks, and thus the transmi ssi on li nes may compensate in part for losses of some raptors to other project facilities. The applicant will install 20 wooden platforms on the E-3-379 I, transmission towers,and will monitor their success. Twenty nest boxes for cavity-nesting kestrels and boreal owls will also be built and monitored.Cavities will be created in the tops of several mature bi rch or spruce trees in an attempt to attract hawk owls,boreal owls, American kestrels,and other cavity-nesting birds. -Seasonal Restrictions Impacts to certain raptor nesting locations will be avoided or minimized by limiting ground and air activi- ties during sensitive periods.Raptor nests will be assumed to be occupi ed unt ill June each year.After that date,protect i on measures for a specifi c nest site wi 11 be wi thdrawn for the remai nder of the year if the nest is documented to be inactive.For the purposes of this discussion,minor ground activity includes short- term reconnaissance and exploration~type programs such as field inventories.Major ground activity involves large numbers of personnel,equipment,surface disturbance, noise,or vehicular activity,such as clearing,pad construction,blasting,and facility construction. ·Golden Eagle -Sensitive time period is from 15 April to 31 August.No facility siting or major ground acti- vity within 0.5 miles during this period.No minor ground activity within 0.25 mi.Aircraft should remain at least 1000 vertical feet or 0.5 horizontal miles away. ·Bald Eagle -Sensitive time period is from 15 March to 15 August.No facil ity siting within 0.5 mi;0.25 mi for major ground activity.0.13 mi for minor activity. Aircraft should remain 1000 vertical feet or 0.25 horizontal mi away. ·Gyrfalcon -Sensitive period is from 15 February to 15 August.Restrictions are the same as for bald eagles. -Electrocution Considerable efforts have been made in the past decade to minimize electrocutions of large raptors along trans- mission lines (see Olendorff et al.1981).Golden and bald eagles typically represent 70-90%of electrocution mortalities in some areas (Ansel and Smith 1980,Benson 1981).The applicant will avoid or minimize electrocu- t i on impacts on eag 1es through the use of appropri ate tower configurations,and the use of supplemental wire guards and perches on the towers.The transmission lines will be constructed during winter to avoid disturbance of nesting raptors. E-3-380 - - I~ ".... ..- I (d) (ii)Waterbi rds Major impacts of the project on waterbirds are not expected (see Section 4.3(c),(xv)),and thus little mitigation is requi red.Many of the waterbi rd speci es occurri ng in the proj ectarea wi 11 benefit from the reservoirs and winter open water areas,but minor impacts resulting from distur- bance and loss of tree-cavities for certain cavity-nesting speci es wi 11 occur.Of parti cul ar concern are impacts of disturbance on trumpeter swans. The applicant will avoid or minimize the effects of distur- bance on trumpeter swans by limiting ground and air activi- ties near those waterbodies used by swans during the nesting season and other times when swans are present. Nest boxes will be built for cavity-nesting waterbirds in an attempt to encourage those spec i es to nest near 1 akes and tributaries outside of the impoundment area. (i i 1)at her Bird s Although large numerical losses of breeding birds will result from inundation and various project facilities,all of the species affected are common outside of the affected areas.Because these birds are .j udgedto have lower importance to most people (in comparison t6 big game species,furbearers,and raptors),specific compensation measures are not planned.Breeding birds have been taken into account,however,in the design of the project.For example,the access road has been aligned primarily in tundra and low shrub vegetation types,which support relatively low numbers and diversities of breeding birds. Sma 11 (non-g ame)Mamma 1s Because of the assumed low priority of this wildlife group,no compensation is proposed to offset the loss of habitat resulting from the project.Small mammals are most abundant and diverse in forest stands;this factor was used in the decision to align the access road primari 1y i ntundra and low-shrub vegetat i on types . E-3-381 ~- BIBLIOGRAPHY -FISHERIES Abbad,F.N.1980.Effect of the Quality of Spawners and Rearing Con- ditions on the Variability of Fingerlings of the Steelhead Salmon, Salmo gairdneri.Vopr Ichtiol 20(2)pp 365-369. Acres American Incorporated.1981.Susitna Hydroelectric Project 1980 Geotechnical Report,Task 5:Geotechnical Exploration.Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. 1982a. Feasibility Report.Final Draft. Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Susitna Hydroelectric Project, Vol.II,Section 3.Al aska •1982b.Susitna Hydroelectric Project;--.,....r....r-a-n-s-m....'s-s-,,...'o-n--;'L-,""n-e-·...,C....o-r-r-.-ido r Sc ree ningel 0 s eo ut Re p0 rt . A1as ka Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. .1982c.Sus itnaHydroe 1ectri c Project: ---rF'"r-a-n-s-m....i-ss-'...·o-n--,..C...,.i-ne.....·....,S.....e......lr-"'e-c-:""ted Route,Final Report -Fi gures.Al aska Power Authority,Anchorage,Al aska. 1982d.Susitna Hydroelectric Project; Fish and·Wildlife Mitigation Policy.Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage,Alaska.11 pp 1982e.Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Access Plan Recommendation -August 1982.Alaska Power Authority, Anchofage,Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.1972.Cook Inlet King Salmon Status Report.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Juneau, Alaska.80 pp. 1974.An Assessment of the Anadromous Fish Popul ations in the Upper Susitna River Watershed between Devil Canyon and the Chulitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage,Alaska. .1976.Fish and Wildlife Studies --....R...e......l-a-:-t-e'"'l'd-t.,....o-,-t,.....h-e-..,.Co-o.....r-p-s-o-f,........,E....n-g"""i-neers Devi 1 Canyon,Wat ana Reservoi r Hydroelectric Project.Alaska Department of Fish and Game, A1 ask a. 1977.Preauthorization Assessment of the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Projects:Preliminary Investigations of Water Quality and Aquatic Species Composition, Alaska. ~ t I•, BIBLIOGRAPHY - 2 1978.Preliminary Environmental Assessment of Hydroe 1ectri c Development on the Su s itna Ri ver. Alaska Department of Fish and Game~Alaska~for U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. 198Ga.Inventory and Cataloging of Sport Fish Waters of the Lower Susitna River and Central Cook Inlet Drainages.Alaska Department of Fish and Game~Anchorage, Alaska. 198Gb.Inventory and Cataloging of the Sport Fish and Sport Fish Waters in the Upper Cook Inlet. Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage,Alaska. 1981a.Adult Anadromous Phase 1 Final Species/Subject Report.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Susitna Aquatic Studies Program.Anchorage,Al aska. 1981b.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Adult Anadromous Fisheries Project.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.1981.Al aska Power Author- ity~Anchorage,Alaska. 1981c.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Vol.1.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Project.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Acres American Incorporated. 1981d.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Juvenile Anadromous Fish Study on the Lower Susitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies. 1981.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Acres American Incorporated. 1981e.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Resident Fish Investigation on the Lower Susitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies. 1981.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Acres American Incorporated. 1981f.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Resident Fi sh Investigation on the Upper Susitna River.Al aska Department of Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies. Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Acres American Incorpora- ted. 1982a.Phase 1 Final Draft Report Aquatic Studies Program.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Acres American Incorporated. .1"""'. BIBLIOGRAPHY - 3 1982b.Phase 1 Final Draft Stock Separation Feasibility Report Adult Anadromous Fisheries Project. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Alaska Power Authority,Alaska. 1982c.An Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important for Spawning,Rear.ing and Migration of Anadromous Species.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Alaska . Alaska Department of Natural Resources.1977.Susitna Basin Biblio- graphy.Alaska Department of Natural Resources,Alaska . . 1979.Susitna River Basin Bib- ---,l....i,....o-g-r-a-ph;-y-.--;:A....l-a~sk;-a--'=D""e-p-a-rt;-m-e-n·t-o~f'Nat ura 1 Res au rce s,A1 as ka. Alyeska Pipeline Service Company.1974.Environmental and Technical Stipulation Compliance Assessment Document for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.,Anchorage,Alaska. VoL!.65 pp. Manual,Report No.EV-002.5A Anchorage,Alaska. 1975a.Erosion Control Field Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., """., - 1975b.Contingency Plan for Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.,Anchorage,Alaska.4th Edition.80 pp. Arminski,T.1982.Personal corrrnunication.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Atkinson,S.Co 1982.Susitna Intergravel Temperature Report.Draft Report.University of Alaska,Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center,Anchorage,Al aska for Acres American Incorpor- ated. Bailey,J.E.,J.J.Pella,and S.G.Taylor.1974.Production of Fry and Adults of·the 1972 Brood of Pink Salmon,Oncohynchus gorbuscha,from Gravel Incubators and Natural Spawning at Auke Bay,Alaska.Fish Bulletin 74(4):pp 961-970. Baily,M.E.1969.Age,Growth,Reproduction,and Food of the Burbot, Lata LotaLinnaeus,in Southwestern Lake Superior.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Wisconsin.pp 667 -674. Baldrige,J.E.·and E.W.Trihey.1982.Potential Effects of Two Alternative Hydroelectric Developments on the Fishery Resources of the Lower Tazimina River,Al aska.Arctic Environmental Informa- tion and Data Center,University of Alaska and Dames and Moore. Anchorage,Alaska.83 pp. BIBLIOGRAPHY - 4 Barrett,B.M.1975a.December Invest i gat ions on the Upper Susitna River Watershed Between Devil Canyon and Chulitna River.Al aska Department of Fish and Game.Unpublished.8 pp. 1975b.January Investigations in th.e Upper Susitna River Watershed Between Devil Canyon and Chulitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Unpublished.10 pp. .1975c.February Investigations in the Upper Susitna----~R~i-ve~r~W~a~tershed Between Devil Canyon and Chulitna River.Alaska Departement of Fish and Game.Unpublished.10 pp. Bechtel Civil &Minerals,Inc.1981.Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project,Interim report.Bechtel Civi 1 &Mi nerals,Inc.San Francisco,California.Report for Alaska Power Authority.1 Vol. Bell,M.C.1973.Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria (Revised 1980).Submitted to Fisheries - Engineering Research Program,Corps of Engineers,North Pacific Division,Portland,Oregon. Binns,N.A.1978.Channelization and Trout..Wyoming Wildlife.Vol. XLII ,No.2,pp 18-21. Bohme,V.E.and E.R.Brushett.1979.Oil Spill Control in Alberta. 1977 Oil Spill Conference (Prevention,Behavior,Control,Clean- up).New Orleans,LA.American Petroleum Institute.Environ- mental Protection Agency,U.S.Coast Guard.pp 91-94. Brett,J.R.1952.Temperature Tolerance in Young Pacific Salmon, genus Oncorhynchus.J.Fi sh.Res.Bd.,Canada 9(6):pp 265-323. Brett,J.R.and D.F.Alderice.1958.The Resistance of Cultured Young Chum and Sockeye Salmon to Temperatures Below Zero Degrees. J.Fish Res.Bd,Canada 15(5).pp 805-813. Burger,C.and L.Swenson.1977.Environmental Surveillance of Gravel Removal on the Trans-Al aska Pipel ine System With Recommendations for Future Gravel Mining.Joint State Federal Fish and Wildlife Advisory Team,Alaska.Special Report Series,No.13. Burger,C.V.,D.B.Wangaard,R.L.Wilmont,and A.N.Palmisano. 1982.Salmon Investigations in the Kenai River,Alaska.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.National Fishery Research Center, Alaska Field Station,Anchorage,Alaska.178 pp. Bustard,D.R.,and D.W.Narver.1975.Aspects of the Winter Ecology of Juvenile Coho Salmon (Oncohynchus Kisutch)and Steel head Trout (Salmo gairdneri).J.Fish Res.Bd.,Canada 32.667-680 pp. - Little·Susitna River Juvenile Alaska Department of Fish and ,-r BIBLIOGRAPHY - 5 Cannon,R.1981.·S~mmer Feeding and Distributional Behavior of Threes- pine Stickleback,Gasterosteus Aculeatus,in Lower Jean Lake, Alaska~1974.Masters Thesis,University of Alaska,Alaska. Childerhose,R.J.and M.Trim.1979.Pacific Salmon.University of Washington Press,Washington.158 pp. Clarke,W.C.,J.E.Shelborne,and J.R.Brett.1981.Effect of Arti- ficial Photoperiod Cycles,Temperature and Salinity on Growth and Smoltingin Underyearling Coho Onchorhynchus Kisutch,Chinook O. tshawtscha and Sockeye O.keta salmon.Aquaculture 2(1-2) 105-116 ~ Clifford,C.G.,W.A.Clemson.,and C.C.Lindsey.1967.The Fresh- water Fishes of British Columbia.British Columbia Provincial Museum,Dept.of Recreation and Conservation,British Columbia, Canada.Handbook No.5.192 pp. Commonwealth Associates,Inc.,Dowl Engineers and Kevin Waring Asso- .ciates.1982.Anchorage-Fairbanks Intertie:Environmental Assessment Report.Alaska Power Authori ty,Anchorage,Alaska.375 pp. deBrugn,M.and P.M.McCart.1974.Life History of the Grayling (Thymallus arcticus)in Beaufort Sea Drainages in the Yukon Terri';' tory.ChapterlI in Arctic Gas Biological Series,Vol.15. Delaney,K.J.and R.Wadman.1979. Chinook and Coho Salmon Study. Game,Al aska.41 pp. Delaney,K.J.,K.Hepler,and K.Roth.1981.Deshka River Chinook and Coho Salmon Study.Alaska Department ofFish and Game,Alaska. Dodson,J.J.and C.Mayfield.1979.Modification of the Rheotropic Response of Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri)by Sublethal Doses of the Aquatic Herbicides Diquat and Simazine.Environmental Pollu- tion.18(2).pp 147-157. Ecological·Analysts,Incorporated.1982.Lake Comanche Dissolved Nitrogen Study.Unpublished"report,Concord,CA,for Milo Bell, Mukilteo,WA.5 pp. Edfelt,L.1981.Memorandum to Richard Logan regarding status of habitat r~gulations.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Alaska. 42 pp. BIBLIOGRAPHY - 6 Environaid.1982.Biologi~al -Ecological Investigations on the Black Bear Creek System near Klawock,Alaska.Environaid.Juneau, Alaska.Report for Alaska Power Authority.180 pp. Fedbrov,K.Y.and L.S.Bogclanova.1979.The Growth and Development of the Larvae of the Pink Salmon,(Oncorhynchus gorbuscha)under Different Temperature and Feeding Regimes.Scripta Publishing Co. Friese,N.V.1975.Preauthorization Assessment of Anadromous Fish Populations of the Upper Susitna River Watershed in the Vicinity of the Proposed Devil Canyon Hydroelectric Project.Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Anchorage,Alaska.Cook In 1et Data Report No.75-2.121 pp •. Gatto,L.W.1976.Baseline Data on the Oceanography of Cook Inlet, Al aska.CRREL Report 76-25.National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Gray,P.,K.Florey,J.Koerner,and R.Marriott.1978.Coho Salmon, Oncorhynchus ki sutch.Fl uorescent Pigement Mark-Recovery Program for the Taku,Berners and Chi lkat Rivers in Southeastern Alaska (1972-1974).Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game,Al aska.Infor-~:' mation Leaflet No.176.77 PP. Graybill,J.P.,R.L.Burgner,J.K.Gislason,P.E.Huffman,K.H.Wyman, R.G.Gibbons,K.W.Kurka,Q.J.Stober,T.W.Fagnan,A.P.Stayman, and D.M.Eggers.1979.Assessment of the Reservoir-Related Effects of the Skagit Project on Downstream Fishery Resources of the Skagit River,Washington.Fisheries Research Institute,Uni- versity of Washington,Seattle,WA 602 pp. Gustafson,J.1977.An Evaluation of Low Water Crossings at Fish Streams Along the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.Joint State/ Federal Fish and Wildlife Advisory Team,Anchorage,Alaska.JFWAT Special Report No.16.39 pp. Hale,S.S.1981a.Freshwater Habitat Relationships Broad Whitefish (Coregonus nasus).Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage, Alaska.26 pp .1981b.Freshwater Habitat Relationships Chum Salmon --""(""'O-n-co-r""t"h-y-nchus ket a).Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game, Anchorage,Alaska.80 pp . .1981c.Freshwater Habitat Relationships Round Whitefish --...,(.....P-r-os-o-pium Cynlindraceum).Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage,Alaska.15 pp. BIBLIOGRAPHY - 7 Hartman,W.L.1971.Alaska's Fishery Resources.The Sockeye Salmon. U.S.Department of Commerce,Washington,Fishery Leaflet 636. Heard,W.R.1966.Observations on Lampreys in the Naknek River System of Southwest Alaska.Vol.II pp.332-339. Horak,G•.C.and J.E.Olsen.1982.Measures to Protect and Improve Fish and Wildlife Resources at Hydropower Developments.Proceed- i ngs of Waterpower 181 Conference,J!Jne 22-24,1981,Washi ngton, D.C.Vol.1.pp 484-491.Army Corps of Engineers,Washington, D.C. Hubbs,C.L.and A.B.Rechnitzer.1952.Report on Experiments Designed to Determine Effects of Underwater Explosions on Fi~h Life. Cal iforni a Fi sh and Game.Vol.88.pp 333-366. Joyce,M.R.,L.A.Rundquist,and L.L.Moulton,1980a.Gravel Removal Guidelines Manual for Arctic and Subarctic Floodplains.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Biological Services Program FWS/OBS -80/09. 169pp.. 1980b.Gravel Removal Studies in Arctic and Subarctic Floodplains in Alaska -Technical Report.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Anchorage,Alaska.403 pp. Kavanagh,N.andA.Townsend.1977.Construction-Related Oil Spills Along Trans-Alaska Pipeline.Joint State/Federal Fish and Wild- 1ife Advisory Team,Al aska.JFWAT Special Report No.15.16 pp. Kay,A.R.and R.B.Lewis.1970.Passage of Anadromous Fish Thru High- way Drainage Structures.California Div.of Highways,CA.15 pp. Kolpack,R.L,B.F.Mechalas,T.J.Meyers,N.B.Patrick,and E.Eaton. 1973.Fate of 0;1 in a Water Environment -Phase 1.Vol.I -a Review and Evaluation of the Literature.Environmental Geology Program,University of Southern California,California,for Div. of Environmental Affairs,American Petroleum Institute.28 pp. Krueger,S.W.1981a.Freshwater Habitat Relationships Arctic Gray- ling (Thymallus Arcticus).Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage,Alaska.65 pp. •1981b.Freshwater Habitat Relationships Pink Salmon--~(MO""n-c-o-rl"""hy-n-chus gorbuscha).Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game, Anchorage,Alaska.41 pp. Lantz,R.L.1971.Guidel ines for Stream Protection in Logging Opera- tions.Research Division,Oregon State Game Commission,Oregon. 29 pp. BIBLIOGRAPHY - 8 Lauman,T.E.1976.Salmonid Passage at Stream-Road Crossings.Oregon Dept.of Fish and Wildlife,Oregon.77 pp. Lindstedt.S.J.1979.Oil Spill Response Planning for Biologically Sensitive Areas.pp 111-114 In:1977 Oil Spill Conference (Pre- vention,Behavior,Environmental Protection Agency.U.S.Coast Guard. Maynard,D.F.and D.O.Weber.1981.Avoidance Reactions of Juvenile Coho Salmon (Ancorhyachus kisutch)to monocyclicaromatics. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science,Vol.38,pp 772-779. McLean R.F.and K.J.Delaney.1978.Alaska1s Fisheries Atlas. Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Alaska.Vo 1.I I. Mih,W.C.1980.Research and Development of a Salmon Spawning Gravel Cleaner (Gravel Gertie),pp 140-153 In:Proceedings from the Con- ference:Salmon-Spawning Gravel,a Renewable Resource in the Pacific Northwest.October 1980.Seattle,Washington.State of Washington Water Research Center,Washington State University,and the University of Washington,Pullman,WA. Mills,M.J.1980.Alaska Statewide Sport Fish Harvest Studies 1980. Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Alaska. Morrow,J.E.1980.The Freshwater Fishes of Alaska.Alaska North- west Publishing Company.Alaska. Nebeker,A.V.,D.G.Stevens,and R.J.Baker.Survival of Salmon Onchorhyncus nerka Sma 1ts in Sea Water After Exposure to Ai r . Supersaturated Water.Prog.Fish Cult.41(1}:pp 30-32. Nelson,R.W.,G.C.Horak,and J.E.Olsen.1978.Western Reservoir and Stream Habitat Improvements Handbook.Vol I.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Fort Collins,CO.FWS/OBS-78/56. Osborne,L.L.,D.R.Ireda1e,F.J.Wrona,and R.W.Davies.1981. Effects of Chlorinated Sewage Effluents on Fish in the Sheep River,Alberta.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. Vol.110(4}.pp 536-540. Pamplin,W.L.1979.Construction-Related Impacts of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System on Terrestrial Wildlife Habitats.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Joint State/Federal Fish and Wildlife Advisory Team,Alaska.JFWAT Special Report No.24.132 pp. ..~. - - Pearse,G.A. A1ask a. 1-29. 1974.A Study of Typical Spring-Fed Streams of Interior Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Alaska.Vol.15,pp Annual Performance Report. BIBLfOGRAPHY - 9 Price,N.A.1982.Personal communication.U.S.Bureau of Land Management,Office of Special Projects,Alaska. R &M Consultants,Incorporated.1982a.Water Quality Interpretation, 1981.Reprod.for Acres American Incorporated,Anchorage, Alaska. 1982b.Reservoir Sedimentation. Reprod.for Acres American Incorporated,Anchorage,Alaska. 1982c.River Morphology.Reprod. for Acres American Incorporated,Anchorage,Alaska. 1982d.Hydraulic and Ice Studies. Reprod.for Acres American Incorporated,Anchorage,Al aska. 1982e. (North)submitted to the Alaska Power Alaska.2 maps. Access Pl an 18,Denal i Authority,Anchorage, 1982f. Stability Analysis.Draft report. Incorporated.Buffalo,NY.1 vol. Task 3 -Hydrology,Tributary Report for Acres Ameri can Reed,R.J ..1964.Life History and Migration Patterns of Arctic Gray- ling,Thymallus Arcticus (Pallas),in the Tanana River Drainage of Alaska.Alaska Department of Fish·and Game,Alaska.Vol.II.pp 1-20.Resources Report. Reiser,D.W.andT.C.Bjornn.1979. ous Salmonids.Report No.1 In: Forest and Rangel and Management Western North America.U.S. General Technical Report PNW-96. Habitat Requirements of Anadrom- W.R.Meehan,ed.Influence of of Anadromous Fish Habitat in Forest Service,Portland,OR. 54 pp. Reiser,D.W.and R.G.White.1981.Influence of Streamflow Reduc- tions on Salmonid Embryo Development and Fry Quality.University of Idaho and Idaho Water and Energy Resources Research Institute, Moscow,ro.Report for Office of Water Research and Technology. 154 pp. Roos,J.F.1960.Predation of Young Coho Salmon on Young Sockeye Salmon Fry at Chignik,Alaska.Transactions of the American Fish- eries Society,Vol.89(4).pp 377-379. Russell,R.B.1980.A Fi sheries Inventory of Waters in the Lake Clark National Monument Area.Alaska Department of Fish and Game and U.S.National Park Service,Anchorage,Alaska.197 pp. BIBLIOGRAPHY -10 Schmidt,D.1982.Habitat Values and Species Distribution in the Upper Susitna Basin,personal interview on September 24,1982.Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Susitna Hydroelectric Aquatic Studies,Anchorage,Alaska. Scott,W.B.and E.J.Crossman.1973.Freshwater Fi shes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada,Canada.Vol.19,pp 4. Skoog,R.O.1982.Access to the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Letter to Eric P.Yould,Alaska Power Authority aated August 20, 1982,from Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Office of the Com- missioner,Juneau,Alaska.5 pp. Stevens,R.J.,A.V.Nebeker,and R.J.Baker.1980.Avoidance Responses of Salmon and Trout to Air Supersaturated Water.Trans Am Fish Soc.109(6):751-754. Swanson,G.A.1979.The Mitigation Symposium:A National Workshop on Mitigating Losses of Fish and Wildlife Habitats.Rocky Moun- tain Forest and Range Experiment Station,Forest Service,USDA, Fort Collins,CO.General Technical Report RM-65.684 pp. Tarbox,K.E.,M.A.Scott,D.O.McKay,and M.R.Joyce.1978a.Biologi- cal Studies of a Proposed Power Plant Site Near Healy,Alaska, May-Oct.1978.Woodward-Clyde Consultants for Stanley Consul- tants,Alaska.112 pp.i I I I I Taylor,S.G.1980. Late Sp awners. Marine Survival of Pink Salmon Fry from Early and Trans.Amer.Fish Soc.109:79-82. Teleki,G.C.and A.J.Chamberlain.1978.Acute Effects of Underwater Construction Blasting on Fishes in Long Point Bay,Lake Erie. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.Vol.35.pp 1191-1198. Thomas,A.E.1975.Migration of Chinook Salmon Fry from Simulated Incubation Channels in Relation to Water Temperature,Flow,and Turbidity.Prog.Fish.Cult.37(4):pp 219-223. Townsend,A.and I~.Kavanaugh.1977.Construction-Related Oil Spills Along the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.Species Report 15 for the Joint State-Federal Fish and Wildlife Advisory Team.16 pp. Trent,T.1982.1982 Draft Tables for Anadromous Fish in the Susitna River.Letter to L.L.Moulton dated November 2,1982.Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game. Trihey,E.W.1982a.Issue Identification and Baseline Data Analysis. 1981 Summary Report.Instream Flow Assessment for the Proposed Sus itna Hydroe 1ectri c Project.Acres Amer i can,Anchorage, Alaska.- ·-BIBLIOGRAPHY -11 1982b.1982 Winter Temperature Study,February 24-25 Trip Report.Unpub 1i shed report.Acres Ameri can Incorporated, Anchorage,Alaska.2~pp. •1982c. ---a-;'-bo-.v-e-T'F"a-=l keet na. Al ask a. Habitat Characteristics of the Susitna River Memo dated.November 5,1982.Anchorage, Tripp.D.B.and P.J.McCart.1974.Life Histories of Grayling (Thyma 11 us Arct icus)and Longnose Suckers (Catostomus catostomus) in the Donnelly River System,Northwest Territories,Chapter 1 in Arctic Gas Biological Series,Vol.20.. Umeda,K,K.Matsumura,G.Okukawa,R.Sazawa,H.Honma,M.Arauchi,K. Kasahara,and K.Nara.1981.Coho Salmon (Onchorhynchus kisutch) transpl anted from North America Into the Ichani Ri ver,'Eastern Hokkaido,Japan.Scientific Report,Hokkaido Salmon Hatchery.35: 9-22.. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.1982.Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.Federal Register 50 CRF 17.11 and 17.12. January 1;1982.pp 13. U.S.Forest Service.1979.Roadway Drainage Guide for Installing Cul- verts to Accommodate Fi sh.U.S.Dept.of Agriculture,Al aska. Alaska Region Report No.42.120 pp. U.S.Geological Survey.1967-1981.Water Resources Data for Alaska, Part I.Surface Water Records,1966 to 1980.U.S.Department of the Interior,Geological Survey,Al aska. Vascotts,G.L.1970.Summer Ecology and Behavior of the Grayling of McManus Creek,Alaska.M.S.Thesis.University of Alaska.132 pp. Wallis,J.1968.Recommended Time,Size and Age for Release of Hatchery Reared Salmon and Stee1head Trout.Fish Commission of Oregon Research Division,Oregon.61 pp. Warren,C.E.1971. Saunders Company. Biology and Water Pollution Control. 434 pp. W.B. Watsjold,D.A.and L.Engle.1978.New Capital City Environmental Assessment Program -Phase I.Source Document 2,Fish and Wild- life Studies.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,U.S.Soil Con- servation Service,Alaska.122 pp. Weber,D.D., Avoidance carbons. Vol.38. D.F.Maynard,W.D.Gronland,and U.Konchin.198? Reactions of Migrating Adult Salmon to Petroleum Hydro-. Canadian Journal of Fisheries·and Aquatic Science. pp 779-781. BIBLIOGRAPHY -12 Wigglesworth D.1982.An Inquiry Into the Alaska Railroad Vegetation Management Maintenance Program.Alaska Center for the Environment,Alaska.8 pp. Wilson,W.J.,E.W.Trihey,J.E.Baldridge,C.D.Evans,J.G.Thiele, and D.E.Trudgen.1981.An Assessment of Environmental Effects of Construction and Operation of the Proposed Terror Lake Hydro- electric Facility,Kodiak,Alaska.Instream Flow Studies.Final Report.Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.Univer- sity of Alaska.Prepared for Kodiak Electric Association,Inc. 412 pp. Wootton,R.J.1976.The Biology of Sticklebacks.Academic Press, London.387 pp. Li verpool SUPPLEME~TAL REFERENCES -FISHERIES American Fisheries Society,Water Quality Section.1979.A Review of the EPA redbook:Quality Criteria for Water.Am Fisheries Society,Bethsida,MD 313 pp. Bates,D.W.,and VanDerwalker,J.G.1964.Exploratory Experiments on the Deflection of Juvenile Salmon by means of Water and Air Jets. Fi sh passage research program.U.S.Bureau of Commerci al Fisheries.Seattle,Washington Bormann,F.H.,T.G.Siccaman,G.E.Likens,and R.H.Whittaker.1970. The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study:Composition and Dynamics of the Tree Stratum.Ecol.Mongr.,40:377-388. Burns,J.W.1970.Spawning Bed Sedimentation Studies in Northern California Streams.California Fish &Game 56(4):253-270. Dehoney,B.and E.Mancini,1982.Aquatic Biological Impacts of Instream Ri ght-of:'way Constructi on and Characteri st i cs of Invertebrate Community Recovery.Right-of-Way Symposium,San Diego,CA Hynes,H.B.N.1966.The Biolo'gy.of Polluted Waters. Uni versity Press,li verpool,UK.202 pp. latvaitis,B.,Bernhard,H.F.,and MacDonald,D.B.1977.Impingement Studies at Quad-Cities Station,Mississippi River.Jensen,L.D~ Third National Workshop on Entrainment &Empingement Ecological Analysts,Inc.Melville,NY. Likens,G.E.,F.H.Bormann,N.M.Johnson,D.W.Fisher,andR.S.Pierce. 1970.Effects of Forest Cutting and Herbic;de Treatment on Nutrient Budgets in the Hubbard Brook Watershed-Ecosystem.Ecal. Monogr.,40:23-47. Peters,John C.1979.Environmental Control Duri ng Dam Construction. In Environmental Effects of Large Dams.ASCE 225 pp. Pierce,R.S.,J.W.Hornbeck,G.E.Likens,.and F.H.Bormann.1970. Effects of El imination of Vegetation on Stream Water Quantity and Qual Hy.pp.311-328.In:Results on Research on Representative and Experimental Basins,Proc.of Internat.Assoc.Sci.Hydrology. UNESCO,Wellington,New Zealand. Shaw,P.A.,and J.A.Maga.1943.The Effect of Mining Silt on Yield of Fry from Salmon Spawning Beds.California Fish &Game.29(1): 29-41. Sheridan,W.L.1981.Information Leaflet No.3:Summary of Recent Knowledge of Certain Factors Influencing Survivial of Salmon in Freshwater.Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Biologi~al Research. Sonnichsen,J.C.,LC.Bentley,G.F.Bailey,and R.E.Nakatani,1973. A Review of Thermal Power Plan Intake Structure Design and Related Environmental Considerations.Hanford Eng.Devel.Lab.NTIS Springfield,VA Stone &Webster,1976.Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation Final Report Studies to Alleviate Fish Entrapment at Power Plant Cool ing Water Intakes.Stone &Webster Engineering Corporation,Boston,Massachusetts 1976.Final Report Indian Point Flume Study Consolidated Edison Company of New York,Inc.Stone &Webster Engineering Corporation,Boston,Massachusetts IJ.S.Environmental Protect ion Agency.1976.Development document for Best Technology Available for the location,Design,Construction, .and Capacity of Cooling Water Intake Structures for Minimizing Adverse Environmental Impact.U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington,D.C.263 pp. 1976.Impacts of Construction Activities in Wetlands of the United States,NTIS,Springfield,VA.392 pp. 1976.Qual ity Criteria for Water.U.S.Government Printing Office,Washington,D.C.pp.256. Vanderwalker,J.G.1967.Response of Salmonids to Low Frequency Sound. In:W.N.Tavolga,ed.,Marine Bio-acoustics,Vol.2,Pergamon Press,Oxford,pp.45-58. Wi cl<ett,W.P. Spawning No date.Effects of Si ltat i on on Success of Fi sh .- BIBLIOGRAPHY -WILDLIFE,BOTANICAL RESOURCES Acres Arne!"i can Incorporated.1982.Susitna Hydroelectri c Project, Reservoir Slope Stability,Task 2 -Survey and Site Facilities, Subtask 2.15 -51 ope 5tabi1 ity and"Erosi on Studi es,Closeout Report,prepared for the Alaska Power Authority. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.1976.Alaska Wildlife Management Plans,Southcentra1 Alaska,A1aska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric /f'-Studies:Big game studies,Alaska summary in letter of S.Fancy from N.Takers1y,Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage. Alaska Depa rtment of Natural Resources.1982. Beluga Cooperative P1anning Program: Preliminary Resource Inventory,Vol 1. Matanusak -Susitna - Land Use Issues and A1 aska Power Authority.1980.Studies identify change in downstream water flow,the Susitna Hydro Studies. Aldous,S.E.1938.Beaver food utilization studies Journal of Wildlife Management,2 pp 215-222. A1 i son,L.M. Alaska, 1971.Activity and Behavior of Red Foxes in Central M.S.Thesis,.University of Toronto. Andersen,R.1971.Effect of human di sturbance on Dall Sheep,A1 aska Cooperative ~~ild1ife Research Unit Quarterly Report 23(3):23-27. University of Alaska,Fairbanks. .......Anderson,S.H.,H.H.Shugart,Jr.and T.M.Smitz.1979 "Vertica1 and Temporal Habitat Utilization"within a Breeding Bird Community" pp 203-216 in.J.G.Dickinson,R.N.Connor,R.R.Fleet,J.A. Jackson and J.C.Krole (editors).The Role of Insectivorous Birds in Forest Ecosystems,proceedings of a symposium held July 13-14,1978 in Nacogdoches,Texas,Acamedic Press,N.Y. Archibald,W.R.1980.Marten progress report No.2 Yukon Wildlife Branch,unpublished report. ~.Arneson,P.1981.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Annual Progress Report,Big Crane Studies Part II:Moose Downstream,prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authori ty. Atwood,E.L.Jr.1938.Some observations on adaptability of Michigan Beavers released in Missouri.Journal of Wildlife Management "2:165-166. Bailey,T.N.and E.E.Bangs.1980.Moose calving areas and use on the Kenai National Moose Range,Alaska Proceedings of the North American Moose Conference and Workshop,16:pp 289-313. Ballard,W.B.,O.A.Cornelius and C.L.Gardner. .Hydroelectric Project.Phase I final report Vol III -Moose-Upstream,Alaska Department report to Alaska Power Authority,91 p. 1981.Susitna Bi 9 Game Stud i es, of Fish and Game Ballard,W.B.,C.L.Gardner,J.H.Westlond and J.R.f)au.1982a. Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Phase 1 Final Report,Big Game Studies:Moose Vol III -Upstream Al aska Department of Fish and Game for the Maska Power Authority. Ballard,W.B.,C.L.Gardner,J.H.Westlund and J.R.Dau.1982b. Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Phase 1 Final Report,8ig Game Studies,Vol V -Wolf Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authority.. Ballard,W.B.,S.D.Miller and T.H.Spraker.1980 Moose Calf Mortality Study,Final Report,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Projects W-17-9,W-17-10, W-17-11,and W-12-1,Job 1.23R. Ballard,W.B.and T.Spraker.1979.Unit 13 Wolf Studies Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Project Report W-17-8,Jobs 14.8R, 14.9R and 14.10R. Ballard,W.B.,T.H.Spraker and K.P.Taylor.1981.Causes of Neonatal Moose Calf Mortality in South-central Alaska,Journal of Wildlife Management 45(2):pp 33~-342. Ballard,W.B.,R.O.Stephenson and T.H.Spraker.1981 Nelchina Basin Wolf Studies.Alaska Department ~f Fish and Game,Project Final Report,W-17-9 and W-17-10. Ballard,W.B.and K.P.Taylor.1978.Upper Susitna River Moose Population Study,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project,Final Report W-17-9 and 10,Job 1.20R. Ballard,W.B.and K.P.Taylor.1980.Upper Susitna Valley ~100se Popul ati on Study,Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game,Project Final Report,W-17-9,~J ..17-10 and W-17-11. Ballard,W.B.,J.H.Westlund,C.l.Gardner and R.Tobey.1982 Susitna Hydroelectric Project Phase 1 Final Report,Big Game Vol III: Dall Sheep,Alaska Department of Fish and Game for Alaska Power Authority. Banfield,A.W.F.1974.The i~ammals of Canada,University of Toronto Press,Toronto. - Banfield,A.W.F.and R.D.Jakimchuk.1980.Analyses of the Characteristics and Behavior of Bamen-ground Caribou in Canada,· Polat Gas Project. Barash,D.O.1974.The Soci al Behavi or of the Hoary Marmot (Marmota col.igatata),Animal Behavior 22:pp 256-251. Barber,S.R.,H.A.Stelfox and J.D.Boden.1975.Churchill River Study (Missinipe Probe):Wildlife (Saskatchewan);Fish and Wi 1d1 ife Branch,Department of Touri sm and Renewable Resources, Saskatoon,Fina.l.Report No.28. Barnes,V.and O.Bray.1967.Population Characteristics and Activities of Black Bears in Yellowstone National Park Unpublished Final Report to the National P~rk Service. Barry,T.W.1961.Some Observations of Moose at Wood Bay and Bathurst Peninsula,NWT,Canadian Field-Naturalist 75(3}:pp 164-165. Barry,ToW.and R.Spencer.1976.Wildlife Response to Oil Well Drilling,Canadian Wildlife Service Program Note No.67,1976. Baxter,R.M.1977.Envi ronmental Effects of Dams and Impoundments. Annual Review of Ecological Systems,8:pp 225-283. Baxter,R.M.and P.Glaude.1980.Environmental Effects of Dams and Impoundments in Canada:Experi ence and Prospects ,Bull eti n 205 Department of Fisheries and Oceans,Ottawa,Canada.. Beak Consultants Ltd.1979.Summary of Impacts of Linear Facilities on Northern Ecosystems:A Literature Review,Beak Consultants Ltd,Calgary,Alberta for Environmental Protection.Service and Department of Supply and Services •. ~Bee,J.W.and E.R.Hall.1956.Manlillals of Northern Alaska on 'the Arctic Slope,miscellaneous paper University of Kansas Museum of Natural History,No.8. Bellrose,F.C.and L.G.Brown.1941.The Effect of Fluctuating Water Levels on the Muskrat Population of the Illinois River Valley, Journal of Wildl ife Management 5:pp 206-212. Bente,P.J.1981.Nesting Behavior and Hunting Activity of the Cyrfalcon,Falco rusticolus,in the Alaska Range,Alaska M.S. Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. -/ Bergerud,A.T.1974a.Decl i ne of Cari bou in North.Arneri ca Foll owi ng Settlement,Journal of Wildlife Management 38 (4)pp 757-778. Bergerud,A.To 1974b.The Role of the Environment in the Aggregation, Movement and Disturbance Behavior of Caribou,pp 552-584 in.,V. Geist and F.Walther (editors),The Behavior of Ungulates and its Relation to Management,IUCN Publication New Series No.24. Bergerud,A.T.1980.A Review of the Population Dynamics of Caribou and Wi 1d Rei ndeer in North Ameri ca,pp 556-581 in.,E.Reimers, E.Gaare and S.Skjenneberg (editors),Reindeer/Caribou Symposium II,Roros,Norway. Bishop,R.H.1969.Preliminary Review of Changes in Sex and Age Ratios of Moose and Their Relation to Snow Conditions on the Tanana Flats,Alaska,paper presented at 6th Annual North American Moose Committee Meeting Feb 3-5,Kamloops,B.C. Bishop,R.H.and R.A.Rausch.1974.Moose Population Fluctuations in Alaska,1950-1972,Naturaliste Canadien 101:pp 559-593. Bliss,loC.and R.W.Wein.1972.Plant Community Responses to Disturbances in the Western Canadian Arctic,Canadian Journal of Botany,50~pp 1097-1109. Bodner,A.and D.R.Wooley.1974.Population Survey of Small Mammals, Chapter 7 in.,Jakimchuk,R.D.(editor),Surveys of Mammals Along the Proposed Gas Pipeline in Alberta,Arctic Gas Biological Report Seri es. ·""", ~I Boelter,D.H.and G.E.Close. Jo~rnal of Forestry,72: 1974.Pipelines in Forested Wetlands, pp 561-563. Bos,G.N.1973.Nelchina Caribou Report,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-17-4 and W-17-5. Bas,G.N.1974.Nelchina and Mentasta Caribou Repo~ts,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Federal Aid in Wildl He Restoration Project,W.;.17-5 and W-17-6. Botler,lo 1940.A Quantitative Study of Muskrat Food,Canadian Field-Naturalist 54:pp 37-40. Boyce,M.S.1974.Beaver Population Ecology in Interior Alaska,M.S. Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Bradt,G.W.1947.Michigan Beaver Management,Michigan Department of Conservation Game Division. Bredthauer,S.and B.Drage.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Task 3 Hydrology:Ri ver Morphology,R &M Consultants Inc for Acres American Inc and the Alaska Power Authority. Broadbooks,H.E.1965.Ecology and Distribution of the Pikas of Washington and Alaska,American Midl Naturalist 73:pp 299-335. Brooks,R.P.and W.E.Ooged,1981.Identification of Muskrat (Ondatra Zibethicus)Habitat in Riverine Environments,Proceedings of the Worldwide Furbearer Conference pres~. Research and Reports on Aeri a1 Bioenvironments and Faunal Laboratory,Fairbanks,Alaska .~. Brown,J.M.1972.The Effects of Overstory Removal Upon Surface Wind ina B1 ack Spruce Bog,Research Note -NC-137 ,United States Forest Service,St.Paul,Minnesota. Brown,R.N.1974.Aspects of yoca1 Behavior of the Raven (Corvus corax)in Interior Alaska,M.S.Thesis University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Brown L.and D.Amadon.1968.Eagles,Hawks and Falcons of the World Vol 2,Country Life Books,Ham1yn Publishing Group Ltd Middlesex, Great Britain. Brown,R.W.,R.S.Johnston,B.Z.Richardson and E.E.Former.1978. Rehabilitation of Alpine Disturbances:Beartooth Plateau Montana,pp 58-73 in.,Proceedi ngs of the Workshop on Revegetation of High Altitude Disturbed Lands,Colorado State University Information Service No.21,Fort Collins. Buckley,J.L.and W.L.Libby.1957. Interpretation of Terrestrial Populations,Arctic Aeromedical Tech Report 57-32 • .Buck1er,S.J.1973.-Some Climatic Effects of a Prairie Reservoir on Shoreline Stations,EnvironmeAt Canada,Atmospheric Environment Service,Downsview,Ontario. Bunnell,F.L.and D.E.N.Tait.1978.Population Dynamics of Bears and their Implications,International Conference on Population Dynamics of Large Mammals,Logan Utah (in press). Burns,J.J.1964.The Ecology Economics and Management of Mink in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta,Alaska,M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Cade,T.J.1960.Ecology of the Peregrine and Gyrfalcon Populations in Alaska,Univeristy of California Pu1ciation Zoology,63:pp 151-290 • Calef,G.W.1980.Status of Rangifer in Canada.II Status of Rangifer in the Northwest Territories.Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Caribou ·Symposium,Roros,Norway, Direktoratetfor n1tog ferskvannstisk,Trondheim. Calef,G.W.,E.OeBock and Gm ••Lortie.1976.The Reaction of Barren- Ground Caribou to Aircraft.Arctic~29:pp 201-212. Calmes,M.A.1976.Vegetation Pattern of Bottomland Bogs in the Fairbanks Area,M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Cameron,R.D.and K.R.Whitten,1976.First Interim Report on the Effects of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline on Caribou Movements,Joint State/Federal Fish and l~ild1 ife Advisory Team,special report No~2. Smith and D.O.Roby.1979. Composition Associated with Pipeline.Canadian Field- Cameron,R.D.and K.R.Whitten.1979.Seasonal Movements and Sexual Segregation of Caribou Determined by Aerial Survey,Journal of Wildlife Management,43:pp 626-633. Cameron,R.D.and K.R.Whitten.1980.Infl uence of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Corridor on the Local Distribution of Caribou.pp 475- 484 in.,Reimbers,E.Gaare and S.Skjenneberg (editors) Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Caribou Symposium September 1979,Roros,Norway. Cameron,R.D.and K.R.Whitten and W.T."Smith.1981.Distribution and Movements of Caribou in Relation to the Kuparuk Development Area, 3rd Interim Report toARCO,EXXON and SOHIO Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Fairbanks. Cameron,R.D.,and K.R.Whitten,W.T. Caribou Distribution and Group Construction of the Trans-Alaska Naturalist,93:pp 155-162. Carbyn,L.N.1968.Overwi ntering Bi rds Observed Along the Mackenzi e Great ~ave Lake Highways,Arctic 21:pp 294-297. Carbyn,L.N.1971.Densities and Biomass Relationships of Birds Nesting in Boreal Forest Habitats.Arctic 24:pp 51-61. Carbyn,L.N.1974.Wolf Population Fluctuations in Jasper National Park,Mberta Canada,Biological Conservation 6:pp 94-101. Carl,E.A.1962.Ecol09Y of the Arctic Ground Squi rre1.Cit ell us parryi,Terrestrial Mammals Investigation Ogotnuk Creek-cape Thompson and Vi ci nity,Pa rt B,Fi na 1 Report prepared by the University of Alaska Department of Biological Science for the United States Atomic Energy Commission. Carl,LA.1971.Population Control in Arctic Ground Squirrels Ecology,52:pp395-413. Carvell,K.L.and P.A.Johnston.1978.Environmental Effects of Right-of-Way Management on Forested Ecosystems,EPRI Research Project 103-3,Palo Alto,California. - - Chal1inor,J.L.and P.L.Gersper, Tundra Soi 1-Pl ant System: Proceedings of the 'Soil 689-695. Vehicle Perturbation Effects Upon a. II Effects on the Chemical Regime Science Society of America 39:pp Chapi n,F.5.II 1.1980.Effects of Cl i ppi ng Upon Nutrient Status and Forage Value of Tundra Plants in Arctic Alaska.pp 19-25 in., E.Reimers,E.Gaare and S.Skjenneberg (editors).Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Caribou Symposium,Roros,Norway, Direktoratet for vi1t of ferskvannsisk,Trondheim. 1982.Anchorage-Fairbanks Assessment Report,Prepa red and Kevin-Waring Associates Chapin,F.S.and M.C.Chapin.1980.Revegetation of an Arctic Disturbed Site by Native Tundra Species.Journal of Applied Ecology 17:pp 449-456. Chapin,F.S.and G.R.Shaver.1981.Changes in Soil'Properties and Vegetation Following'Disturbance of Alaskan Arctic Tundra. Journal of Applied Ecology,18:pp 605-617. Chapin,F.S.III and K.Van Cleve.1978.Nitrogen and Phosphorus Distribution in an Alaskan Tussock Tundra Ecosystem:Natural Patterns and Impl ications for Development.pp 738-753 in., D.C.Adriano and I.L.Brisbin eds,Environmental'Chemistry and Cyc 1i ng Processes,Un ited States Depa rtment of Energy Sympos i urn Series Conference 732429,Washington D.t. Chapman,R.C..1977.The Effects of Human Di sturbance on Hol ves (Canis lupus L),M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Chatelain,E.F.1951.Winter Range Problems of Moose in the Susitna Valley,Proceedings of the Alaska Science Conference 2:pp 343-347. Clark,J.W.and ToM.Campbell.1977.Short-term Effects of Timber Harvests on Pi ne Marten.Behavi or and Ecology,Unpub 1i shed report USDA Forest Service. Coady,J.W.1974.Influence of Snow On Behavior of Moose, Naturaliste Canadien,101:pp 417-436. Coady,J.W.1982.Moose (Alces alces)Chapter 46 in.,J.A.Chapman and G.A.Feldhammer (eds),Wild Mammals of North America: Biology,Management and Economics.,The John Hopkins University Press;Baltimore,Maryland. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.1980.Environmental Engineering and Ecological Baseline Investigations Along the Yukon River,Prudhoe Bay Haul Road,Report 80-19,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Hanover,N.H. Cole,G.F.1971.Preservation and Management of Grizzly Bears in Yellowstone National Park,Bioscience,21:pp 858-864. Commonwealth Associates Incorporated. Transmission Intertie,Environmental with assistance from DOWLEngi neers for the Alaska Power Authority. Conant,B.,and R.King.1981.Alaska-Yukon Breeding Pair Survey--1981,U.S.Fi sh and ~Hl dl i fe Servi ce,Paci fi c Waterfowl Flyway Report 80. Conn,,J.S.and J.A.De Lapp.1982.Changes in Weed Species Assemblage with Increasing Field Age,Aaroborealis,in press. Conn,J.S.and J.A.Delapp. Field Age in Alaska. 1983.Weed Species Shifts with Increasing Weed Science,in press. - Conrad,H.A.1979.How to Know the Mosses and liver worts,Wm.C. Brown Co.,Philadelphia. Cowan,I.Met.and C.J.Guiguet.1956.The Mammals of British Columbia,British Columbia Province Museum Handbook II. Cowardin,l.M.,V.Carter,F.C.Golet and E.T.LaRoe.1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deep Water Habitats of the United States,United States Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FWSjBS-79-31. Craighead,F.C.,Jr.,and J.J.Craighead.1972.Oata on Grizzly Bear Denning Activities and Behavior obtained by using Wildlife Telemetry,pp 84-106,in.,Proceedings of the International Conference on Bear Research and Management,Calgary Alberta. Craighead,J.J.1980.A Proposed Delineation of Critical Grizzly Bear Habitat in the Yellowstone Region,Bear Biology Association Monograph Series No.1. Craighead,J.J.and F.C.Craighead.1972..Grizzly Bear-Major Relationships in Yellowstone National Park,PP 304-333 in., Proceedi ngs of the Internati ona 1 Conference on Bear Resea rch and Management,Calgary,Alberta. Craighead,J.J.and J.A.Mitchell.1982.Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) Chapter 25 in.,Chapman,J.A.and G.A.Feldhamer (eds)Wild Mammals of North America,Biology Management,Economics,The John Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. Craighead,J.J.and J.S.Sumner.1980.Grizzly bear habitat analysis,Section 2:evaluation of grizzly bear food plants,food categories and habitat.Wildlife-Wildlands Institute,University of Montana,Missoula. -" ~I Craighhead,J.J.,J.R.Varney and F.C.Craighead. population analysis of the Yellowstone grizzly bears. 40,Montana Forest and Conservati on Experiment University of Montana,Missoula. 1974.A Bull et in" Station. Crawford,J.E.and l.A.Dunkeson.1974. reduce raptor losses on the national Research Report No.2. Powerl ine standards to resource lands.Raptor CrUITI,H.1976.Mosses of the Great lakes forest. Herbarium,University of Michigan,Ann Arbor. University Cummi ng,H.C.1974.Moose management in Ontari 0 from 1948 to 1973. NaturalistieCanadien,101:pp 643-687. Curatolo,J.A.,M.S.Boyce,M.A.Robus,R.H.Kacyon.1981. Aquatic furbeaver habitat survey -final report.Prepared by ,~laska Biological ReSearch,Fairbanks for U.S.Forest Service, Juneau.Contract No.53-0109-0-0052. Curatolo,J.A.,S.M.Murphy and M.A.Robus.1982.Car"i bou responses to the pipeline/road complex in the Kuparuk oil fields, Alaska,1981.Unpublished report prepared by Alaska Biological Research for ARGO Alaska,Inc. Gushwa,G.T.and J.Coady.1976.Food habits of moose,Al ces al ces, in Alaska:a preliminary study using rumen contents analysis. Canadian Field-Naturalist,90(1):pp 11-16. Dabbs,P.L.,Friesen,W.and S.Mitchell. Arctic Gas Biological Report Series. Vegetation. 1974.Small mammal study. 2:pp 38-67.in.,Pi pe 1i ne Davis,J.L.1978.Hi story and current status of Al aska cari bou herds.D.R.Kl ei nand R.G.White (eds.).Parameters of Caribou Population Ecology in Alaska.Proceedings ofa symposium and workshop,Biological Paper,University of Alaska Special Report No.3.,pp 1-8. Davis,.J.L.and A.W.Franzmann.1979. interrelationships:A review and assessment. North American Moose Conference and Workshop. Fire-moose-caribou Proceedings of the 15:pp 80-118. I- \ Davis,.J.L.,Valkenburg,P.and H.V.Reynolds.1980.Population· dynamics of Alaska's western arctic caribou herd.Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Caribou Symposium,Roros,Norway. Direktoratet for yilt og ferskvannsfisk,Trondheim. Dearborn,N.1932.Foods of some predatory fur-bearing animal s in lV,ichigan.University of t<1ichigan,Ann Arbor,School.of Forest Conservation,Bulletin No.1. Denniston,R.H.1956.Ecology,behavior and population dynamics of the Wyoming or Rocky Mountain moose.Zoologica,41:pp 105-118. Denny,R.N.1950.Program for beaver admi ni strati on and management in Colorado.M.S~Thesis,Colorado Agriculture and Mechanics College,Fort Collins. Densmore,R.V.1979.Aspects of the seed ecology of woody plants of the Alaskan taiga and tundra.Ph.D.Thesis,Duke University, Durham,N.G. Densmore,R.and J.C.Zasanda.1977.Germination requirements of Alaskan Rosa Acicularis.Canadian Field Naturalist,91:pp 58-62 de Vos,A.1952.Ecology and management of Fi sher and Marten in Ontario.Ontario Department of Lands and Forests,Technical Bulletin. de Vos,A.1960.Behavior of barren-ground caribou on their calving grounds.Journal of Wildlife Management.24:pp 250-258. Dice,L.R.1921.Notes on the mammal s of interi or Al aska.Journal of Mammalogy,2:pp 20-28. Didrickson,J.C.and K.P.Taylor~1973.Lower Susitna Valley moose population identity study.Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Federal Aid in 14ildlife Restoration Project.Final Report, W-17-8 and 9.Job 1.16R. Dirschl,H.J.1972.Evaluation of ecological effects of recent low water levels in the Peace-Athabasca delta.Canadian ~~ildlife Service Occasional Paper No.13. Doerr,J.G.1980.Modeling the population decline of two Alaskan cari bou herds.Proceeds of the 2nd Internat i ona 1 Reindeer/Caribou Symposium,Rros,Norway,Direktoratet for vilt 09 ferskvannsfisk. - IS1!l , Douglass,R.J.,G.L.Fisher andM.Mair.1976.Movements and habitat select;on of fur-bear;ng mammal s near Chi ck Lake,NWT. Unpubl ;shed Report by Renewable Resorces Consulting Services for Arctic Gas Biological Reports. Drake,J.J.1981.The effects of surface dust on snowmelt rates. Arctic and Alpine Research,13:pp 219-223. Drury,W.H.,Jr.1956.Bog flats and physiographic processes in the Upper Kuskolewim River region,Alaska.Contrib.Gray Herbarium No.178. Dorrance,M.J.,Savage,P.J.and D.E.Huff.1975. snowmobil es on white-ta il ed deer.Journa 1 Management,39:pp 563-569. Effects of of Wil dl ife - - Eager,J.T.and M.R.Pelton.1980. smokey Mountain:focus on ursid Conference on Bear Research and (in press) Human-bear interactions in the agression.Fifth International Management,Madison,Wisconsin. Eide,S.H.,1980.Caribou survey-inventory progress report.In R. A.Hinman (ed.)Annual Report of Survey-Inventory Activities. Alaska Federal Aid in Wildl ife Restoration Project.W-17-11.pp 31-34. Elgmark,K.,1976.Agemnant.bear population in southern Norway and problems of its conservation.In:Third International Conference on Bear Research and Management,Bi nghamton,NY.pp 281-299. Erickson,A.W.and J.E.Nellor.1964.Breeding biology of the black bear,Part 1.In:Erickson,A.W.,J.Nell or and G.,1\. Petrides,The.Black Bear in Michigan.Michigan State Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 4.pp 1 -45. _. Erl inge,S.1967.Food habits of the fish-otter,Lutra Rutra L.,in south Swedish habitats.Viltrevy,4:pp 371-443. Errington,P.l.1943.An analysis of mink predation upon muskrats in the north-central United States.Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station,Research Bulletin,320:pp 797-924. :"...., Er,i ngton,P.L.1954.The speci al epizootics in muskrat populations. pp 377 -393. responsiveness of minks to Ecological Monographs,24: Canadi an Wil dl ife - Errington,P.L.1963.Muskrat populations.Iowa State University Press ,Ames. Er ski ne , A• J•1977 • Bi rdsin B0 rea 1 Ca nada• Service Report Series 41. Euler,D.1978.Wildlife.In:Progress Report of Lakeshore Capacity Study for Ontario Ministry of Environment,Ministry of Housing and Ministry of Natural Resources.Chapter 7,pp 7.1-7.29 Fancy,S·.G.1980.Spring studies of Dall sheep along the northwest Alaskan pipeline route.Unpublished Report by LGl Alaska Research Associ ates for the Northwest Al askan Pi pel i ne Company. Fancy,S.G•.1982.Some aspects of the envi ronmental effects of ai r cushion vehicle operations in the Arctic.Final Report Ak-28, prepared by LGl Al aska Research Associ ates.Incorporated for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Fancy,S.G.(in press).Movements and activities of caribou near oil drilling sites in the Sagavanirktok River floodplain,Alaska. Submitted to Arctic. Ferris,C.R.·1979. northern·Main. 421-427. Effects of interstate 95 on breedi ng bi rds in Journal of Wildlife Management,43(2):pp Fischer,C.A.,D.C.Thompson,R.L.Wooley and P.S.Thompson.1977. Ecological studies of caribou on the Boothia Peninsula and in the District of Keewatin,NWT,1976 with observations on the reaction of caribou and muskoxen to aircraft·disturbance,1974-1974. Unpublished Report to Polar Gas Project,T?ronto. Franzmann,A,W.and R.E.LeResche.1978.Al askan moose blood studies with emphasis on condition evaluation.Journal of Wildlife Management,42:pp 344-357. Fraser,D.,D.Arthur,J.K.Morton and B.K.Thompson.1980.Aquatic feeding by moose (Alces alces)in a Canadian lake.Ho1arctic Ecology,3:pp 218-223. Fuller,1.K.and L.B.Keith.1980.Summer ranges,cover type use, and denning of black bears near Fort McMurray,Alaska.Canadian ~Field-Naturalist,94(1):pp 80-83. Gabrielson,1.N.and F.C.Lincoln.1959.The birds of Alaska. Stackpole Company and the Wildlife Management Institute.- Gardner,C.L.and W.B.Ballard. project,phase 1 final report: prepared by the Alaska Department Power Authority,March. 1982.Susitna hydroelectric Bi g game,Vol.VI II-t40l veri ne, of Fish and Game for the Alaska Gartner,B.L.1982.Controls over regeneration of tundra graminoids in a natural and a man-disturbed site in Arctic Alaska.M.S. Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks.. Gasaway,W.C.and J.w.Coady.1974.Review of energy requi rements and oumen fermentation in moose and otter ruminants.Naturaliste Canadien,101:pp 227-262. Gei st,V.1971.A behavi oural approach to the management of wil d ungulates.In:E.Duffy and A.S.Watt (eds.)The scientific management of ani mal sand pl ant communiti es for conservati on. British Ecological Society,Blackwell,Oxford.pp 413-424. Geist,V.1971.Mountain sheep:a study on behavior and evolution. University of Chicago. Geist,V.1975.Harassment of large mammals and birds.Unpublished Report to the Berger Inquiry Committee,University of Calgary. Gerell,R.1968.J=ood habits of the mink,l"4ustela vison Schreb.,in Sweden.Viltrevy,5:pp 119-211. Gerrard,J.M.and P.N.Gerrard.1975.Ecological road planning in northern Saskatchewan.Blue Jan,33:pp 131-139. Gersper,P.L.and S.L.Challinor.1975.Vehicle perturbation effects upon a tundra soi 1 pl ant system.In:effects of morphological,physical and environmental properties of the soils.Proceedings of the Soil Science Society of America,39: pp 737-743. Gilbert,F.F.1978.Interim report on semi-aquatic mammal studies, 1977-1978.Draft report prepared for the Alberta Oil Sands .Environmental Research Program. Gillespie,W. relation northern Urbana. 1960.Breeding bird and small mammal populations in to the forest vegetation of the subarctic region of Manitoba.Ph.D.dissertation,University of Illinois, Gipson,P.S.,S.W.Buskirk and T.W.Hobgood.1982.Susitna hydroelectric project,phase 1 final report:furbeaver studies. Prepared by the Alaska Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Un i versity of Al aska,Fairbanks for the Al aska Power Authority, April • ""'" - Goddard,J.1970.Movements of moose in a heavily hunted area of Ontario.Journal of Wildl ife Management,34:pp 439-445. Gollop,M.A.,J.R.Goldsberry and R.A.Davis.1974.Aircraft disturbance to moulting sea ducks,Herschel Island,Yukon Territory,August 1972.Arctic Gas Biological Report Series,14: pp xii-xiii and 202-231. I~ Green,J.E. airports. Canada. 1981.The control of wil dl ife probl ems at Canadi an Techn i ca 1 report,prepared by LGL Ltd.for Transport - Green,R.G.and C.A.Evans.1940.Studies on a popul ation cycl e of snowshoe hares on the Lake Alexander area.Part 1,Gross Annual Census 1932-1939,Journal of Wi 1dl i fe r~anagement,4(2):pp 220-238. Grodzinski,W.and B.A.Wunder.1975.Ecological energetics of small mammal s.In:Goll ey,F.B.,K.Petrusewi cz and R.Ryszkowski (eds.),Small mammals:their productivity and population dynamics,Cambridge University Press,London.pp 173-204. Guthrie,R.D.1965.Variability in characters undergoing rapid evolution,an analysis of Microtus molars.Evolution,19:pp 214-233. Guthrie,R.D.1968.Paleoecology of the late Pleistocene small mammal community from interior Alaska.Arctic,21:pp 223-244. Hakala,J.B.1952.The life historyand general ecology of the Beaver (castor canadensis kuhl).in interior Alaska.M.S.Thesis. University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Hallinan,T.1922.Bird interference on high tension electric ~transmission lines.Auk,39:573 pp. Hamilton,G.D.and P.D.Drysdale.~1975.Effects of cutover width on browse utilization by moose.North American Moose Conference and Workshop,11:pp 5-25. Hamilton,W.J.,Jr.1940.The summer fodds of minks q41d racoons on themontezuma marsh,New York.Journal of l,.JildlifeManagement,4: pp 80-84. Hammond,M.C.andW.R.Forward.1956.Experiments on causes of duck nest predation.Journal of Wildlife Management,20:pp 243-247. Hanscom,J.T.and T.E.Osterkamp.1980.Potential caribou-ice problems in the Watana reservoir,Susitna hydroelectric project. The Northern Engineer,12:pp 4-8. Hanson,H.C.1953.Vegetation types·in northwestern Al aska and comparisons with communities in other Arctic regions.Ecology 34: pp 111-140. Hanson,W.C.1981.Caribou (rangifer tarandus)ecounters \'Iith pipelines in northern Alaska.Canadian Field-Naturalist,95:pp 57-62. - Harder,L.D.1979.Winter feeding by porcupines in montane forests of southwestern Alberta.Canadian Field-Naturalist,93:pp 405-410. Harding,L.E.1976.Den site characteristics of Arctic coastal grizzly bears (ursus arctos L.)on Richards Island,Northwest Territories,Canada.Canadian Journal of Zoology,54(8):pp 1357-1363. Harbo,S.J.,Jr. south-eastern Fairbanks. 1958. Alaska. An investigation of mink in interior and M.S.Thesis.University of Alaska, Harding,L.E.and hydrocarbon Territori es, Research and J.A.·Nagy.1977.Responses of gri zzly bears to exploration on Richards Island,Northwest Canada.Fourth InternationalConference on Bear Management,Kalispeu,Montana,(in press). Harrison,J.G.1963.Heavymortality of mute swans from electrowtion. Wildfowl Trust AnnualReport,14:pp 164-165. Hawley,V.C.·and F.E.Newby.1957.Marten home ranges and population fluctuations.Journalof Mammalogy,38:pp 174~184. Hay,K.G.1958.·Beaver cencus methods in the rocky mounta in regi on. Journal of Wildlife Management,22(4):pp 359-402. Hegg,K.M.1970.Forest resources of the Susitna Valley,Alaska. Uni ted States Department of Agriculture •Forest Servi ce Research Bulletin,PNW-32. Heimer,W.E.1973.Doll sheep movements and mineral lick use.Final report.Federal aid in wildlife restoration projects t~-17-2 through W-17-5.~Job 6.1R.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Heimer,W.E.January 15,1980.Letter toJoseph C.Greenley,Director of Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Hemming,.J.E.1971.The distribution and movement patterns of caribou in Alaska.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Wildlife Technical Bulletin,No.1. Hemming,J.E.and K.A.Morehouse (ed).1976.Wildlife Atlas: Trans-Alaska oil pipeline,Valdez to Prudhoe Bay.Joint State Federal Fi sh andWildl ife Advisory Team.Special Report No.3. - - r- Hennan,E.1973.Statusof waterfowl on thePeace-Athabasca Del ta. pp kl-kl05 in:The Peace-Athabasca Delta project.Technical appendices,Vol.2.Queen1s Printer,Edmonton. Henshaw,J.1968.The activities of thewintering caribou in northwestern Al aska in rel ation to weather and snow condit ions. International Journalof Biometeorology,12:pp 21-27. Herbert,R.A.and K.G.S.Herbert.1969.The extirpation of the Hudson River peregisne falcon populations.pp 133-154 in: Hickey,J.J.(ed).Peregisne falcon populations,their biology and decline.University of Wisconsin Press,Madison. Hernandez,H.1973.Naturalplant recolonization of surficial disturbances,Tuktoyaktuk peninsula region,Northwest Territories.Canadian Journal of.Botany,51:pp 2177-2196. Herrero,S.1976.Conflicts between man and grizzly bears in the national parks of North America.pp 121 ..147 in:Third Internat iona 1 Conference on Bear Research and.Management. Binghamton,New York. Hettinger,L.R.and A.J.Janz.1974.Vegetation and Soils of northeastern A1 aska.Arct ic Gas Bi 01 ogy Report Seri es 21.North Engineerin9 Service Co.Ltd.,Edmonton,Canada. Hilden,O.1965.Habitat selection in birds:A review.p 39 in: J.Verner (ed)Arian Behavior and Habitat Management. Hill,E.P.1982.Beaver (casta canadensis).Chapter 14 in:Chapman, J.A.and G.A.Feldhamer (ed).Wild Mammals of North America: Biology,Management,Economics.The Johns Hopkins University Press.Baltimore,Maryland. Hock,R.J.1960.Seasonal variations in physiology functions of Arctic ground squirrels and black bears.Bulletin of the Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology,124:pp 155-171. Hock,R.J.and V.Cottini.1966. Valley,Alaska.American Midl. Mammals of the Little Susitna Natural ist,76:.pp 325-339. - Hodgdon,K.W.and J.H.Hunt.1953.Beaver management in Maine. Maine Department of Inland Fish and Game.Game Division Bulletin No.3. Hoffmann,R.S.,J.W.Koepp1,and C.F.Nadler.1979.The relationships of the Amphiberingian marmots (1I1ammalia: Sciuridae).Occasional Papers.Museum of Natural History. .University of Kansas,No.83. Hok,J.1969. phenomena Management Interior. A reconnaissance of tractor trails and on the north slope of Alaska.Bureau Publication.United States nepartment related of Land of the Horej s i,B.L.1981.Behavi aura 1 responses of barren-ground cari bou to a moving vehicle.Arctic,34:pp 180-185. Hornocker,M.G.and H.S.Hash.1981.Ecology of the wolverine in northwestern Montana.Canadi an Journal of Zool 09Y ~59:pp 1286-1301. Hudson,R.J.1977.Wildlife and resource development. Agriculture Bulletin.University of Al~erta~ pp 13-15. Facul ty of Edmonton. Hulten,E.1968.Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories. Stanford University Press. Irving,L.and J.Krog.1955. subarctic birds and mammals. pp 667-680. Body temperature of Arctic and Journal of Appl ied Physiology,6:- Jegl urn,J.K.1975.Vegetation-habitat changes caused by damming a peatland drainageway in northern Ontario.Canadian Field-Naturalist,89~pp 400-412. Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission of ,l\laska. Major ecosystems of Alaska,map. 1973. Jones,F.F.,R.F.Batchelor,H.R.Merriam and L.A.Viereck.1963. Sheep and goat investigations.Vol.III,Annual Project Segment Report.Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-6-R-3, Work Plan E.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Jonkel,C.J.and 1.MeT.Cowan.The black bear in the spruce-fir forest.Wildlife Monograph,No.27. Karr,J.R.and R.R.Roth.1971.Vegetation structure and airan diversity in several new world areas.American Naturalist,105: pp·423-435. - Keith,L.B.1963.Wildlife's ten-year cycle. Wisconsin Press.Madison,Wisconsin. University of Keith,L.B.and L.A.Windberg.1978.A demographic analysis of the snowshoe hare cycle.Wildlife Monographs,No.58. Kel sall,J.P.1968.The migratory barren-ground caribou of Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service Monograph 3.Queen's Printer,Ottawa. Kelsall,J.P.and D.R.Klein.1979.The state of knowledge of the porcupine caribou herd.Transcription of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 44. Kemper,J.B.,R.G.Thompson and R.Quinlan.1977.The potential impact of the mackenzie highway construction in northern wetlands.Unpulished report.Canadian Wildlife Service. Edmonton. ,""", Kendeigh,S.C.1947.Bird populations studies in the coniferous forest income during a spruce budworm outbreak.Ontario Department of Lands and Forestry Biology,Bulletin 1. Kerr,J.A.1973.Physical consequences of interference with rivers. pp 664-696 in Fluvial Processes and Sedimentation:Proceedings of the Hydrology Conference.Edmonton,Al berta.May 8-9,1973. Prepared by the Subcommittee on Hydrology of the Inland Division of Environment Canada. Kessel,B.,S.D.MacDonald,D.A.·Gibson,B.A.Cooper and B.A. Anderson.1982.Susitna hydroelectric project,phase I final report.Environmental Studies,Subtasle Fill.Birds and Non-Game Mammals,prepared by the University of Alaska Museum, ~-Fai rbanks for the Al aska Power Authority. Kessel,B.,S.M.Murphy and L.J.Vining.1980.Waterbirds and wetl ands,Chi sana-Upper Tanana ri vers,Al aska,1979 (with emphasis on the Scottie-Desper Creek wetlands).Unpublished report prepared by the University of Alaska Museum,for Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. Kimney,J.W.and J.A.Stevensen.1957.A Forest Disease survey of Alaska.United States Department of Agriculture.Agricultural Research Services Supplement,247:pp 87-98. King,J.G.and B.Conant.1980.Alaska-Yukon breeding pair survey-- 1980.US Fish and Wildlife Service,Pacific Waterfowl Flyway Report 79.- King,J.G.and B.Conant.1981. on Alaskan nesting habitats. The·1980 census of trumpeter swans American Bi rds,35:pp 789-793. K1 ei n,D.R.1967.Interacti ons of Rangi fer tarandus (rei ndeer·and caribou)with its habitat in Alaska.Finnish Game Research,30: pp 289-293. Klein,_D.R.8.The introduction,increase and crash of reindeer on St.Matthews Is1 and.Journal of Wil d1 ife Management,32:pp 357. Klein,D.R.1971.The reaction of reindeer to obstructions and disturbances.Science,173:pp 393-398. Klein,O.R.1974.The reaction of some northern mammals to aircraft disturbance.pp 377-383 in:Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Game Biologists,Stockholm,Sweden. Knight,R. R.1972.Biological considerations in the delineation of habitat.pp 1-3 in:Herreo,S.(ed)Bears-Their Biology and Management.IUCN Publication New Series 23. ,..... I Knowlton,F.F.1960.Food habits,movements and populations of moose in the Gravelly Mountains,Montana.Journal of Wildlife Management,24:pp 162-170. Knudsen,G.J.1962.Relationship of beaver to forests,trout and wildlife in Wisconsin.Wisconsin Conservation Department, Technical Bulletin No.25. Knudson,K.F.and J.B.Hale.1968.Food habits of others in the great lakes region.Journal of Wildlife Management,32:pp 89-93. Koehl er,G.M.and M.G.Hornocker.1977.Fi re effects on marten habitat in the se1 way-bitterroot wil erness.Journal of Wil dl ife Management,41:pp 500-505. Koehler,G.M.,W.R.Moore and A.R.Taylor.1975.Preserving the pine marten-management guide1 ines for western forests.western Wildlands,2:pp 31-36. Korschgen,L.J.1958.December food habits of mink in IYlissouri. Journal of Mamma1ogy,39:pp 521-527. Krebs,C.J.and J.H.Myers.1974.Population cycles in small mammals.Advances in Ecological Research,8:-p 267-399. - MI, Krebs,C.J.and 1.Wingate.1976. Kluane region,Yukon Territory. pp 379-389. Sma 11 mammal commun it i es of the Canadian Field-Naturalist,90:- Kratt,Po'1959.Demon of the north.A1 fred A.Knopf,New York,N.Y. Translated from German by Edward Fitzgerald. Kucera,E.1976.Deer flushing distance as related to observer1s mode of travel.Wildlife Society Bulletin,4:pp 128-129. Lawson,B.and R.Johnson.1982.Mountain sheep (Ovis canadensis and Ovis dal1i).Chapter 52 in:Champman,J.A.and G.A.Fe1dhamer (ed),Wild Mammals of North America:Biology,Management, Economics.The John Hopktns University Press.Baltimore, Maryland. Lawson,D.E.,J.Brown,K.R.Everett,A.W.Johnson,V.Komarkova, B.M.Murray,D.F.Murray and P.J.Webler.1978.Tundra disturbance and recovery following the 1949 exploratory drilling, Fish Creek,northern Alaska.United States Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Report 78-28. Leader-Williams,N.1980.Population ecology of reindeer on south Georgia.Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Caribou Symposium,Rros.Norway.Direktoratet for vilt og ferskvannsfisk,Trondheim.pp 664-676. ,""", - - Lenarz,M.1974.The reaction of Dall sheep to an FH-llOO hel icopter. Chapter 3 in:R.D.Jakimchuk (ed),The Reaction of Some Mammals to Aircraft and Compressor Station Noise Disturbance.Arcitc Gas Biological Report Series,Vol.23. Lensink,C.J.,R.O.Skoog andJ.L.Buckley.1955.Food habits of marten in interior Alaska and their significance.Journal of Wildlife Management,19(3):pp368. Lent,P.C.1966.Calving and related social behaviour in the barren- ground caribou.Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychol,23:pp 701-756. Lent,'P.C.and R.Summerfield.1973.Population dynamics and seasonal movement patterns of Dall sheep in the AtigunRiver .-,Canyon.Al aska Cooperati ve Wil dl ife Research Unit monthl y report.University of Alaska,Fairbanks. - - r Lentfer,J.1965.Caribou report.Alaska Departant ofFish and Game, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration,ProjeS-5 andW-6-R-6. LeResche,R.E.1974.Moose migrations in North America.Natural iste Canadien,101:pp 393-415. LeResch,e,R.E.1975.The international herds:present knowledge of the forty mi 1e and porcupi ne cari bou·herds.Fi rst Internati onal Reindeer and Caribou Symposium Biological Papers.University of Alaska,Special Report No.1:pp 127-154. LeResche,R~E.,R.H.Bishop and J.W.Coady.1974.Distribution and habitats of moose in Alaska.Naturaliste Canadien,101:pp 143-178. LeResche,R.E.and J.L.Davi s.1973.Importance of nonbrowse foods to moose on the Kenai Peninsula,Alaska.Journal of Wildlife Management;37(3):pp 279-287. Linderman,S.1972.A report on the sheep study at the Dietrich River headwaters.Appendix III in:Nichols,L.and W.Heimer (ed) Sheep Report,Vol.XIII,Project Progress Report,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Projects W-17-3 and ~1-17-4.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Juneau. Linderman,S.1974.Ground tracking of Arctic grizzly bears.Final Report,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-17-6,Job 4.12R.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Juneau. Lindzey,F.G.and E.C.Meslow.1977.Home range and habitate use by bl ack bears in southwestern Washi ngton.Journal of Wil dl ife Management,41:pp 413-425. Linkswiler,C.1982.Factors influencing behavior and sightability of moose Denali National Park,Alaska.M.S.Thesis,Univeristy of Alaska,Fairbanks. Lotsperch,F.B.1979.Stream water quality.pp 24-25 in:L.A. Vierech and C.T.Dyrness (ed),Ecological Effects of the Wickersham Dome Fire ne~r Fairbanks,Alaska.United States Forest service General Technical Report PNW-90. MacArthur,R.A.1978.Winter movements and homerange of the muskrat. Canadian Field Naturalist,92:pp 345-349. - MacArthur,R.H. diversity. 1964.Envi ronmental factors affecti ng bi rd speci es American Naturalist,98:pp 387-397.• MacArthur,R.A.,V.Geist and R.H.,Johnston.1982. behavioral responses of mountain sheep to human Journal of Wildlife Management,46(2):pp 351-358. Cardiac and disturbance.-MacArthur,R.A.,R.H.Johnston andV.Geist.1979.Factors i nfl uenci ng heart rate in free-rangi ng bi gham sheep:a physiolngical approach to the study of wildlife harassment. Canadian Journal of Zoology,57:pp 2010-2021. MacArthur,R.H.and J.W.MacArthur.1961.On bird species diversity. Ecology,42:pp 594-598. MacDonald,S.M.,C.F.Mason and J.S.Coghill.1978.The Otter and its conservation in the River Teme catchment.Journal of Applied fcology,15:pp 373-384. MacDonald,5.0.1980.Habitats of Small Mammals and Birds: Evaluating the Effects of Agricultural Development in the Delta Junction Area,Alaska.Unpublished report prepared by the Univers.ity of Alaska Museum,Fairbanks,for the Alaskan Division of Lands. Machida,S.1982.Beaver survey -Inventory progress report:Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.PP 115-117 in Hi ilman,R.A.(ed).Annual report of survey inventory activities:Part IV Furbearers. MacInnes,COO.and R.K.Misra.1972.Predation on Canada goose nets at McConnel River,Northwest Territories.Journal of Wildl He Management,36:pp 414-422. Magoun,A.1982.Home Range and Movements of Wolverines in Northwest Alaska.Unpublished Ph.D.Dissertation,University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Markgren G.1969.Reproduction of moose in Sweden,Viltr.evy,6:pp 127-299. Marshall,W.H.1936.A study of the winter activities of the mink. Jnurnal of Mammalozy,17:pp 382-392. - 1""'\ _. - McArthur,K.L.1969.The behavior of grizzly bears in relation to people in Glacier National park.A literature review, unpublished National Park Service Progress Report,Glacier National Park,Montana. McCourt,K.H.,,J.D.Feist,O.Doll and J.J.Russell.1974. Disturbance studies of caribou and other mammals in the Yukon and Alaska,1972.Arct4c Gas Biological Report Series 5. McCourt,K.H.and L.P.Horstman.1974.The reaction of barren ground caribou to aircraft.Chapter 1 in Arctic Gas Biological Series 23. McIlroy,C.1974.Moose Survey -Inventory Progress Report 1972,Game Management Unit 13.PP 66-74 in D.E.McKnight (ed)Annual Report of Survey -Inventory Activities,Part II:Moose,Caribou, Marine Mammals and Goat,Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Report,Project W-17-5. McIl roy,C.1976.Moose Survey -Inventory Progressive Report 1974, Game I"'anagement Units 11 and 13.PP 49-55 and 'pp 61-79 in D.E. McKnight (ed)Annual Report of Survey -Inventory'Activities, Part II,I"'oose,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Report,Project W-17-7. McIntyre,J.'1978.The common loon:Part III,Population on Itasca State Park,Minnesota 1957-1976 •.Loon,50:pp 38-44. McKendrick,J.,W.Collins,D.Helm,J.McMullen and J.Koranda.1982. SusitnaHydroe1ectric Project,Phase I Final Report, Environmental Studies,Subtask 7.12:Plant Ecology Studies. Prepared by the University of Alaska Agricultural Experiment Station,Palmer for the Alaska Power Authority.' McLaren~M.A.and D.L.McLaren.1981. Boreal and Subarcti c Habi tats Northwestern Manitoba.Canadi an 418-427 • Relative Abundances of Birds in of Northwestern Ontario and Field Naturalist,95(4):pp .- i~ McLaren,P.L.and M.A.McLaren.1978.Studies of terrestrial bird popu1 at ions in Northwestern Ontari 0 and Northern Manitoba,June 1977.Unpublished report prepared by LGL Ltd.,Toronto,for Polar Gas Project,Toronto. Meagher,M.and J.R.Phillips.1980.Restoration of natural populations of grizzly and black bears in Yellowstone National Park.Fifth International Conference on Bear Research and M~nagement,Madison,Wisconsin (in press). Mealy,S.P.,C.J.Jonke1 and R.Demardin.1981.Habitat Criteria for rizz1y Bear r"'anagernent.pp 276-289 in XIIIth Congress of Game Biologists -Grizzly Bear Habitat Research. Mech,L.D.and L.L.Rogers.1977.Status distribution and movements of martens in northeastern Minnesota.USDA Forest Service, National Central Fore$t Experiment Station,Research Paper NC-143. Milke,G.1977.Animal feeding:Problems and Solutions.Joint State/Federa 1 Fi sh and Wil dl ife Advi sory Team,Speci a1 Report No. 14,Anchorage. Miller,D.,LL.Boeker,R.S.Thorsell and R.R.Olendorff.1975. Suggested practises for raptar protection onpowerl i nes.Raptar Research Foundation and Edison Electric Institute,Provo,Utah. Miller,F.L.and E.Broughton.1973.Behaviour associated with mortality and stress in maternal-filial pairs of barren-ground caribou.Canadian Field Naturalist,87(1):pp 21-25. - - - Mills,F.L.and E.Broughton.1974. Ground of Kaminuriah Caribou. Serial No.26. Calf Mortaility on the Calving Canadian ~~ildlife Service Report Miller,F.L.and A.Gunn.1979.Responses of Peary caribou and muskoxen to turbo-helicopter harassment,Prince of 14ales Island, NlH,1976-1977.Canadian Wildlife Service,Occasional Paper No. 40. Miller,S.D.,and W.B.Ballard.1980.Estimates.of the density structure and·biomass of an·interior Alaskan brown bear population,Appendix V in W.B.Ballard,S.D.Miller,and T.H. Spraker Moose Cal f Mortal ity Study,Final Report P-R Projects W-17-9,W-17-10,W-17-11 andW-21-1,Job 1.23R.. Miller,S.D.and W.B.Ballard.1982.Horning of Transplanted Alaskan Brown Bears.Journal of Wildlife Management,46(4):pp 869-876. Miller,S.D.and D.C.McAllister.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Phase I Final Report:Big Game,Vol VI -Black Bear and Brown,Bear.Prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authority. Modaferri,R.D.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Phase I Final Report,Bi 9 Game Studies:Moose Vol II -Downstream.Prepared by the Al askan Department of Fi sh and Game for the Al aska Power Authority. Modaferri,R.D.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Quarterly Report Downstream Moose Studies.Prepared by the Alaska Department of, Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authority. Moen,A.N.1976.Energy conservation by white-tailed deer in the winter.Ecology,57:pp 192-198. Mould,E.1979.Seasonal Movements related to habitat of moose along the Colville River,Alaska.Murrelet 60:pp 6-11. - - -; Muri e,A.1944. Series No.5. D.C. The wolves of Mt.McKinley National Park,Fauna U.S.Government Printing Office No.5,Washington, .-, - Murie,A.1962.Mammals of Mount McKinley National Park,Alaska. Mount MCKinley National History Association. Murie,O.J.1927.The Alaska red squirrel providing for winter. Journal of Mammalogy,8:pp 37-40. Murray,D.F.1961.Some factors affecti ng the producti on and harvest of beaver in the Upper Tanana River Valley,Alaska.M.S.Thesis, University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Murray,D.F.1980.Threatened and Endangered Plants of Alaska,United States Deparment of Agriculture,Forest Service Publication. Nagy,J.A.and R.H.Russell.1978.Ecological status of the boreal gri zzl y bea r (Ursus arctos L)Annual Report for 1977.Canadi an Wil dl ife Servi ce,Edmonton,Al berta. National Academy of Science,Airborne Particles,Subcommittee on Airborne Particles,Committee on Medical and Biological Effects of Environmental Pollutants,Division of Medical Sciences, Assembly of Life Sciences,Natural.Resource Council,University. Pa rk Pres s,Ba 1 timore,Ma ryland. Newburg,R.W.and G.W.Malaher.1972.The Oestruction of Manitoba1s Last Great River.Naturaliste Canadien (Ottawa),1(4):pp 4-13. Nichols,L.1971.The Doll Sheep and its management in Alaska • ..Transcripti.on of the 1st North American Wild Sheep Conference. Nichols,L.1972.Productivity in unhunted and heavily exploited 0011 sheep populations,in Nichols,L.and W.Heimer (eds)Sheep Report,Vol XIII,Project Progress Report,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Projects W-17-3 and W-17-4,Alaska Department of Fish and Game~ Nieland,B.J.and L.A.Vierech.1977.Forest Types and Ecosystems. PP 109-136 in North Jlmerican Forest Lands at Latitudes North of 60 Degrees.Proceedings of a symposium held at the University of Alaska,Fairbanks,by the United States Forest Service. Nieman,D.J.and H.J.Oirschl.1973.Waterfowl populations on the Peace-Athabasca delta,1969 and 1970.Canad i an ~Ji1 dl ife Servi ce Occasional Paper No.17. Nodler,F.A.1973.Food habits,vocalizations and territoriality of Alaskan red squirrels (g.Tamiasciurus),.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Olendorff,R.R.1976.The food habits of North American golden eagles.American MidI.Naturalists,95:pp 231-236. Osgood,W.H.1900.ResUlts of a biological reconnaissance of the Yukon River region.North American Fauna,19:pp 7-45. Paradiso,J.L.and R.M.Nowak.1982.Wolves (Canis lupus and Alloes). Chapter 21 in:Chapman,J .A.and G.A.Fedl hamev (eds),Wi Id Mammals of North America:Biology,Management,Economics,The Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. Parker,G.R.1972.Biology of the Kaminuriak population of Barren- ground Caribou,Part 1,total numbers,mortality,recruitment and seasonal distribution.Canadian Wildlife Service Report Serial .No.20. Parker,G.R.and L.D.Morton.1978.The estimation of winter forage and its use by moose onclearcuts in Northcentral Newfoundland. Journal of Range Management,31:pp 300-304. Peace,T.R.1962.Pathology of trees and shrubs.Oxford Press,New York. Pearson,A.M.1975.The northern interior grizzly bear ursus arctos L.Canadian Wildlife Service Report,Series No.34. Pearson,A.M.1976.Population characteristics of the Arctic mountain grizzly bear.pp 247-260 in:M.Pelton,J.Lentfer,and E.Folk (eds)Bears--their biology and management.IUCN New Series 40. Peek,J.M.1974.On the nature of winter habitats of shiras moose. Naturaliste Canadien,101:pp 131-141. Pelton,M.R.1982.Black bear (ursus americanus).Chapter 24 in: Chapman,J.A.and G.A.Feldhamer (eds)Wild Mammals of North American:Biology,management,economics;the Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. Penner,D.F.1976.Preliminary baseline investigations of furbearing and ungulate mammals using lease No.17.Environmental Research Monographs,1976-3,Syncrude Canada Limited. Perry,H.R.,Jr.1982.Muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus and neofiber alleni).Chapter 15 in:Chapman,J.A.and G.A.Feldhamer (eds) Wild mammals of North America:Biology,management,economics. The Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. - - Peterson,R.O. Alaska. 1980.Wolf-moose investigation on the Kenai Peninsula, Quarterly report No.15,Kenai National Moose Range. Pitcher,K.W.1982.Susitna hydroelectric project,phase I final report,big game studies,Volume IV,Caribou,prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authority. -I - Pitcher,K.W.1982.Susitna hydroelectric project,quarterly report, Car"ibou studies,interim report prepared by the Al aska Department of Fish and Game for the Alaska Power Authority. Price,R.1972.Effect of human disturbance on Dall sheep.Final report,Alaska cooperative wildlife research unit quarterly report,23(3):pp 23-28.University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Prince,H.H.1968.Nest sites used by wood ducks and common goldeneyes in New Brunswick.Journal of Wildlife Management,32: pp 489-500. Pulliainen,E.1968.reeding biology of the wolverine (gulo gulo L.) in Finland.Ann.Zool.Fenn.5:pp 338-344. Quick,H.P.1953.Wolverine,fisher and marten studies in a wilderness region.Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference,19:pp 452-461. Quimby,R.1974.Grizzly bear.Chapter II in:.R.D.Jakimchuk (ed) Mammal studies in I~ortheastern Alaska with emphasi s withi n the Canning River drainage.Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 24. Rausch,R.A.1958.The problem of railroad-moose conflicts in the Susitna Valley.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project,Final Report 12(1):pp 1-116. Rausch,R.A.1967.Some aspects of the population ecology of wolves in Al aska.American Zool ogi st,1:pp 253-265. Rausch,R.A.1969.A summary of solf studies in Southcentral Alaska, 1957-1968.Transcription of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resourch Conference,34:pp 117-131. -Rausch,R.A.1971.Moose report.Al aska Department of Fi sh and Game, P-R Pr6ject W-17-1 •. Rausch,.R.A.and A.M.Pearson.·1972.Notes on the wol veri nes in Alaska and the Yukon Territory.Journal of Wildlife r~anagement, 36:pp 249-268. Ream,C.H.1976.Loon productivity,human disturbance and pesticide residues in northern Minnesota.Wilson Bulletin,88:pp 427-432. Retzer,J.L.1955.Physical envi ronmental effects on beavers in the Colorado Rocki es,pp 277-287 in Proceedi ngs of the 35th Annual Conference of the Western Association of State Game and Fish Commissioners. ,- Reynolds,H.V.1979."Structure,status,reproductive biology, movement distribution,and habitat utilization of a grizzly bear population in NPR-A (Western Brooks Range,Alaska).Final report to the Al aska Depa rtment of Fi sh and Game,proj ect 105C (Work Group 3). Reynolds,H.V.1980.North slope grizzly bear studies,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-17-11.. Reynols,H.V.,J.A.Curatolo and R.Quimby.1976.Denning ecology of .grizzly bears in northeastern Alaska,pp 403-411 in:Third Internati onal Conference on Bear Research and Management, Binghamton,New York. Rickard,W.E.,Jr.1972.Preliminary ecological evaluation of the effects of air cushion vehicle tests on the Arctic tundra of northern Al aska.Uni ted states Army Col d Regi ons Research and Engineering Laboratory Special Report 182. - - Ritcey,R.W.1974. Canadien,101: Moose harvesting programs in Canada. pp 631-642. Naturaliste Ritchie,R.•Results of aerial·surveys of spring waterfowl concentration areas along the Alaskan gas pipeline route,Tetlin Junction to Pump Station No.3.Unpublished report prepared by Alaska Biological Research for Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. Ritchie,.R.and J.Hawkings.1981.Summer and fall waterbird i nvesti gat ion s along the proposed northwest Al askan gas pipeline,Alaska 1980 prepared by Alaska Biological Research, unpublished report to Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. Roby,D.O.1978.Behavioral patterns of barren-ground caribou of the Central Arctic Herd adjacent to the Trans-Alaska pipeline.M.S. Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Roby,D.O.1980.Winter activity of caribou on two arctic ranges. Proceedings of the 2nd International Reindeer/Car"ibolJ Symposium; Roros,Norway,Oirektoratet for vilt og ferskvannsfisk. Roger,L.1976.Effects of mast and berry crop failures on .survival growth and reproductive success of black bears.Transactions of the North Ameri can Wil dl ife Natural Resource Conference,41:pp 431-438. Rogers,L.L.,D.W.Kuehn,A.W.Erickson,E.M.Harger,L.J.Verme and J.J.Ozoga.1976.Characteristics and management of black bears that feed in garbage dumps,campgrounds or residential areas,pp 169-175 in:Third International Conference on Bear Research and Management,Binghamton,New York. ""'" ~, r Roseneau,D.G.1972.Summer distribution,numbers,and food habits of the cyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus L.)on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska.M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Roseneau,D.G.and P.J.Bente.1979.A raptor survey of the proposed Northwest Al askan Pi pel i ne Company gas pi pel i ne route:the U.S. Canada Border to Prodhoe Bay,Al aska.Unpubl i shed report by LGL Ecological Research Associates Inc.,Fairbanks,Alaska to Fluor Northwest,Inc. Roseneau,D.G.,C.E.Tull and R.W.Nelson.1981.Protection strategies for peregrine falcons and other raptors along the proposed Northwest Alaskan gas pipeline route.LGl Ecological Research Associates Inc.,Fairbank.s,Alaska.Unpublished report to Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. Rutherford,W.H. population. 1953.Effects of a summer fl ash flood upon a beaver Journal of Nammalogy,34:pp 261-262. Ruttan,R.A.1974.Observations of grizzly bear in the northern Yukon Territory and Mackenzie River Valley,1972.Chapter VII in: R.A.Ruttan and D.R.Wooley (eds.)Studies of furbearers associated with proposed pipeline routes·irr the Yukon and Northwest Territories,Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 9. Ryder,R.H •.1955.Fish predation by the otter in Michigan.Journal of Wildl He I~anagement,19:pp 497-498. Sargent,A.B.,G.A.Swanson and H.A.Doty. by mink,mustela vison,on waterfowl. 89:pp 208-214. 1973.Selective predation American r~idl.Naturalist, Scheffer,V.B.1951.The rise and fall of a Reindeer herd. Scientific Monthly,73:pp 356~362. Schneider,S.H.1978.Climatic limits to growth:How soon?How serious?pp 219-225 in J.Williams (ed)Carbon dioxide~climate and societY,IIASA Proceedings Series Environment,Volume I, Pergamon Press,N.Y. Schultz,R.O.and J.A.Bailey.1978.Responses of national park elk to human activity.Journal of Wildlife Management,42:pp 91-100. Schwartz,C.C.and A.W.Franzmann.1981.Black bear predation on moose.Federal Aid in Wildl ife Restoration Progress Report on Projects W-17-2,Job No.17.3R. Schwei nsburg,R.1974.Oi sturbance effects of ai rcraft on waterfowl on North Slope Lakes,1972.Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 14:i-iv plus pp 1-48. Schweinsburg,R.E.,M.A.Gollop and R.A.Davis.1974.Preliminary waterfowl disturbance studies,Mackenzie Valley,August 1972. Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 14:xiv-xv plus pp 232-257. Scott,J.W.1940. 21:462. Winter kill in beaver.Journal of Mammalogy, Scotler,G.W.1967.The winter diet of barren ground caribou in Northern Canada.Canadian Field Naturalist,81:pp 33-39. Scotter,G.W.1970.Wild fires in relation to the habitat of barren ground caribou in the taiga of Northern Canada.Proceedings of the Annual Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference,10:pp 85-105. Seal ander,J.A. Michigan. 1943.Winter food habits of mink in southern Journa 1 of Wil dl ife Management,7:pp 411-417.- Shadle,A.R.and T.S.Austin.1939.Fifteen months of beaver work at Alleghany State Park,New York.Journal of Mammalogy,20:pp 299-303. Shank,C.C.1979.Human related behavioral disturbance to northern large mammals:A bibliography and review prepared by Foothills Pipelines (Yukon)Limited for the Alaska Highway gas pipeline proj ect. Sheldon,C.·1930.The \'1ilderness of Denali:explorations of a hunter-naturalist in northern Alaska,Charles Scribner's Sons, N.Y. Sheldon,W.G.1950.Denning habitsand home range of red foxes in New York state.Journal of Wildlife Management,14(1):pp 33-42. Shepherd,P.E.K.1958.Food habits of railbelt moose.In job completion report 12(1),Project W3-R-12,Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration,Alaska Game Commission. Skoog,R.O.1968.Ecology of the caribou (Rangifer tarandus granti) in.Alaska.Ph.D.Dissertation,University of California, Berkeley,California. - Slough,B.G.and R.M.Sadleir.1977. for beaver (castor canadensis Zoology,55:pp 1324 -1335. A land capability classification kuhl).Canadian Journal of Smith,D.G.and J.R.Murphy.1972.Unusual causes of raptor mortality.Raptor Research,6:pp 4-5. Smi th,D.R.1954.The bighorn sheep in Idaho--its status,1 ife history,and management.Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Bulletin No.1,Boise,Idaho. Smith,M.e.1967.Red squirrel (tamiasciurus hudsonicus)ecology ,-during Spruce Cove failure in Alaska.M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Soper,J.D.1964.The mammals of Alberta.Ham1y Press,Edmonton. Sopuck,L.G.,C.E.Tu11,J.E.Green and R.E.Salter.1979.Impacts of development on wildlife:A review from the perspective of the Col d Lake project,prepared by LGL Limited,Edmonton for Esso Resources Canada limited,Calgary,Alberta. Souti ere,LC.1978.The effects of timber hasti ng on the marten. Ph.D.Thesis,University of Maine,Orono. A1 aska ,,- - - - Sparrow,S.D.,F.J.Wding and LH.Whiting.Effects of off-road vehicle traffic on soils and vegetation in the Oera1 i Highway Region of Alaska.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,33: pp 20-27. Spindler,M.A.and B.Kessel.1980.Avian populations and habitat use in Interior Alaska Taiga.Syesis,13:pp 61-104. Spindler,M.A.,S.M.Murphy and B.Kessel.1981.Ground censuses of waterbird populations in the Upper Tanana Valley,Alaska,PP 133-148 in:F.L.Miller and A.Gunn (eds)Symposium on census and inventory methods for popu1 at i on and habitats.Proceedings of the Northwest Section of t~e Wildlife Society,April 10,1980, Calgary,Alberta. Spraker,T.and W.B.Ballard.1979.Unit 13 brown bear studies. Alaska Department of Fish and Game,P-R Project Report W-17-R. Spraker~T.H.,IN.B.Ballard,and D.S.Miller.1981.Brown bear studies,game management Unit 13.A1 aska Department of Fi sh and Game,Final P-R Project Report W-17-10 and W-17-11,Job 4.13R. Stanley,W.C.1963.Habits of the red fox in northeastern Kansas. University of Kansas,Miscellaneous Publication No.34. Stephenson,R.O.and L.Johnson.1973.Wolf report. Department of Fi sh and Game,P-R Project Report,\.4-17-4. Steventon,·J.D.and J.T.Major.1982.Marten use of habitat in a commercially clear-cut forest.Journal of wildlife Management, 46(1):pp 175-182. Stockstad,D.S.,M.S.Morris and E.C.Lory.1953.Chemical characteristics of natural licks used by big game animals in r Western Montana.Proceedi ngs of the 18th North Ameri can Wi 1d1 ife Conference. Storm,G.L.1972.Population dynamics of red foxes in north central United States.Ph.D.Dissertation,University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Stornorov,D.and A.W.Stokes.1972.Social behavior of the Alaska brown bear,pp 232-242 in:S.Herrero (ed)Bears-their biology and management,IUCN Publication New Series 23. Streubel,D.P.1968.Food storing and related.behavior of squirrels (tamiasciurus hudsonicus)in Interior Alaska. Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. red M.S. Stringham,S.F.1974.Mother-infant relations in moose. Canadien,101:pp 325-369. Natural i ste Sus i tna Hydroe 1ect ri c Environmental Studies, and the Alaska Power Summerfield,B.L.1974.Population dynamics and seasonal movement patterns of Dall sheep in the Atigun Canyon area,Brooks Range,· Alaska.M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Surrendi,D.C.and S.A.DeBock.1976.Seasonal distribution popul at i on status and behavi or of the Porcupi ne cari bOlJ herd. Unpubl i shed report by the Canadi an Wil dl ife Servi ce,Edmonton for the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Investigations.144 p... Svendsen,G.E.1982.Weasels (Mustela species).Chapter 30 in: Chapman,J.A.and G.A.Fedlhamer (eds)Wild mammals of North America:Biology,management,economics.The Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. Swartz,L.G.,W.·Walker II,D.G.Roseneau and A.M.Springer. Populations of gyrfalcons of the Seward Peninsula,Alaska, 1968-1972.pp 71-75 in:Murphy,J.R.,C.M.t'ihite and B.E. Harrel (eds)Population status of raptors.Raptor Research Report No.3,Raptor Research Foundation,Vermillion,South Dakota,1975. Tait,D.E.N.1980.Abandonment as a reproductive tactic-the example of grizzly bears.American Naturalist.115(6):pp 800-808. Tankersley,N.G.1981.Mineral lick use by moose in the central Alaska Range.M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,Fairbanks. Terrestrial Environmental Specialists.1982. Project,Feasibility Report,Vol.II: Section 3,prepared for Acres American Authority.. Thomson,J.W.1979.Lichens of the Alaskan Arctic Slope,University of Toronto Press.- Todd,A.M.D.1982.Natural Regeneration:Policies,procedures and practices in'the Prince George forest region.pp 5-8 in. M.Murray (ed)Forest regeneration at high latitudes:Experience from Northern Brit ish Col urnbi a.Pac ifi c Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.Miscellaneous report No.82-1. Tomm,H.O.1978.Response of wild ungulates to logging practices in Alberta.M.S.Thesis,University of Alberta,Edmonton. Toweil,D.C. Oregon. 1974.Wi nter food hab i ts of ri ver otte r in weste rn Journal of Wildl ife Management.38:pp 107-112. Fish and Wil dl ife and plants,review threatenedespecies. TracY,D.M.1977.Reactions of wildlife to human activity along the Mt.McKinley National Park Road.M.S.Thesis,University of Alaska,,Fairbanks. United States Army Corps of Engineers.1977.Final environment impact statement,hydroelectric power development,upper Susitna'River Basin,southcentral railbelt area,Alaska.Office Chief Engineers,Department of Army,Washington,D.C. United.States Department of the Inter;or.1980. .Servi ceo Endangered and threatened wi 1dl i fe of plant taxa for listing.as endangered or Federal Register 45:pp 0-82569. United States Fish and Wildl ife Service.1975.Southcentral rail belt area upper Susitna river basin hydroelectric project two dam plan.U.S.Department of the Interior,Anchorage,Alaska. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Register.Vol.45,No.193. 1980.Notice,Federal ,- University of Al aska Agricultrual Experiment Station and Terrestrial Envi ronmenta.l Special i sts,.Inc.Susitna hydroel ectri c project, environmenta'1 studies annual report 1980. Subtask 7.12,Plant ecology studies,prepared for Acres American Inc.and the Alaska Power Authority,May 1981. Van Ballenberghe,V.1977.Migratory behavior of moose in Southcentral Alaska.Proceedings of he International Congress of Game Biologists,13:pp 103-109. Van Ballenberghe,B.1978.Migratory behavior of moose in Southcentral Alaska.Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of Game Bi 01 ogists,Atl anta,Georgi a. Van Ballenberghe,V.,A.W.Erickson and D.Byman.1975.Ecology of the timber wol f in Northeastern ~1innesota.Wi 1dl i fe Monographs No. 43. Van Ballenberghe,V.and J.M.Peek.1971.Radiotelemetry studies of moose in Northeastern Mi nnesota.Journal of Wil dl ife Management. 35:pp 63-71. 1980.The in an open 8iological Van Cleve,K.1977.Recovery of disturbed tundra and taiga surfaces in Alaska~pp 422-455 in J.Cairns et al (eds)Recovery and restoration of damaged ecosystems.University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville. Van Cleve,K.and L.A.Viereck.1981.Forest succession in relation to Nutrient cycl ing in the Boreal Forest of Alaska,Chapter 13 in D.C.West,H.H.Strugart,and o.B.Botkin (eds)Forest Succession:Concepts and applications,Springer-Vertag,N.Y. Vander Zande,A.N.,W.J.ter Keurs and W.J.Vanderweijden. impacts of roads on the densities of four bird species field habitat -evidence nf a long distance effect. Conservation.18:pp299-321.. Van Zyll de Jong,C.G.1975.The di stribution and abundance of the wolverine (gulo gulo)in Canada.Canadian Field Naturalist.89: pp 431-437. Vermeer,K.1973.Some aspects of the nesting requirements of common loons in Alberta.Silson Bulletin •.85:pp 429-435. Viereck,L.A.1966.Plant succession and soil development on gravel outwash of the t~uldrow Glacier,Araska.Ecological Monographs. 36:pp 131-199. Viereck,L.A.1970.Forest succession and soil development aC\jacent to the Chema River in Interior Alaska.Arctic and Alpine Research.2:pp 1-26. Viereck,L.A.1975.Forest Ecol09lJ of the Alaskan Taiga.Proceeding of the Circumpolar Conference on Northern Ecolog. Viereck,L.A.and C.T.Oyrness.1979.Ecological effects of the Wickersham dome fire near Fairbanks,Alaska.United States Forest Service General Technical Report,PNW-90. Viereck,LA.and C.T.Dyrness.1980.A preliminary classification system for vegetation of Alaska.U.S.Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station,General Technical Report PNW-I06. Viereck,L.A.and E.L.Little,Jr.1972.Alaskan trees and shrubs,· Agriculture Handbook No.410,United States Oepartment of Agriculture,Forest Service. Viereck,L.A.and L.A.Schandelmeier.1980.Effects of fire in Alaska and adjacent Canada-a literature review.Bureau of Land Management Technical Report 6,BLM/AU/TR-80106. Ward,A.L.,J.J.Cupal,G.A.Goodwin and H.D.Morris.1976.Effects of highway construction and use on big game populations.Federal Highway Administration Office of Research and Development, Washington,D.C.Report FHWA-Ro-76-174. - - - - Ward,J.G.1975.Continuing surveys of terrestrial bird populations in the Mackenzie Valley,June 1974.Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 30,Chapter 4. Ward,J.G.and D.L.Sharp.1974.Effects of aircraft disturbance on moulting sea ducts at Herschel Island,Yukon Territory,August 8, 1973.Chapter 2 in:W.W.H.Gunn,·W.J.Richardson,R.E. Schweinsburgand LD.Wright (eds)Studies on terrestrial bird populations,moulting sea ducks and bird productivity in the Western Arctic,1973,Arctic Gas Biological Report Series 29. Warner,J.1968.A reduction rainfall associated with smoke from sugar cane fires ~an inadvertent weather modification?Journal of Applied Meteorology,7:pp 247-251. Watson,G.H.,W.H.Prescott,LA.deBock,J.W.Nolan,M.C.Dennington, H.J.Poston and LG.Stirling.1973.An inventory of wildlife habitat of·the Mackenzi e Vall ey and the Northern Yukon. Envi ron.-Soc.Committee on Northern Pi pel i nes,Task Force on Northern Oil Development,Report No.73-27. Webber,P.J.·1978.Spatial and temporal variation of the vegetation a,d its production,Barrow,Alaska.pp 37-112 in L.L.Tieszen (ed)Vegetatiori and Production Ecolo~y of an Alaskan Arctic Tundra,Springer-Verlag,N.Y. Weeden,R.B.1972. Steese Hi ghway. Bulletin No.2. Effects of hunt i ng on Rock Harmi gan along the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Technical ...- Weeks,H.P.and C.M.Kirkpatrick.1976.Adaptations of white-tailed deer to naturally occurring sodium deficiencies.Journal of Wildlife Management.40:pp 610-625 • .Wein,R.W.and L.C.Bliss.1973. Communities following fire. Changes in Arctic Eriophorum Tussock Ecology,54:pp 845-52. Weir,R.D.1976.Annotated bibliography of bird kills at man-mande obstacles:a review of the state of the art and solutions. Canadian Wildlife Service,Ontario Region,Ottawa. Welsh,S.L 1974.Anderson's flora of Alaska and adjacent parts of Canada.Brigham Young University Press,Provo,Utah. West,S.D.1979.Habitat responses of microtine rodents to central Alaskan forest succession.Ph.D.Thesis,University of Cal iforni a,Berkel eYe Westland,J.H.1982.Susitna hydroelectric project,interim report. Wolf 9 Quarterly Report,prepared by the Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game for the Al askan Power Authority. White,C.M.1974.Survey of the peregrine falcon and other raptors in t he proposed Susitna Ri ver reservoi r impoundment areas.U.S. Fi sh and Wi 1dl i fe Service unpubl i shed interim report. White,C.M.,Lo.Ray and L.W.Sowl.1977.The 1970-1972-1974 raptor surveys along the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline.World Conference on Birds of Prey,1:pp 222-229. Williams,J.(ed) 1.I .A.S.A. Press,N.Y. 1978. Proceedings Carbon dioxide,climate Series Environment,Va. and 1, society. Pergamon Willson,M.F. structure. 1974.Avi ar community organi zati on and habitat Ecology,55:ppl017-1029. Nati ona 1 Wilson,D.E.1982.Wolverine (gulo gulo).Chapter 32 in:Chapman, J.A.a,d G.A.Feldharner (eds)Wild Mammals of North America: Biology,Management,Economics.The Johns Hopkins University Press,Baltimore,Maryland. Wilson,K.A.1954.The role of mink and otter as muskrat predators in northeastern North Carolina.Journal of Wildlife Management,18: pp 199-207. Wolff,J.A.1977.Habitat utilization of snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus)in interior Alaska,Ph.D.Thesis,University of California,Berkeley. Wolff,J.D.1976.Util i zation of hardwood browse by moose on the Tanana fl oodplai n of interi or Alaska.Un i ted states Department of Ag ri cul ture,Forest Servi ce Research Note,Portl and,Oregon. Wol ff ,J.G.·1978.Burning and brows i ng effects on wi 11 ow growth in interior Alaska.Journal of Wildlife Management,42:pp 135-140. Woods,C.A.1973.Erethi zon dorsatum.Ameri can Soci ety of Mammal ogy, Mammalian Species 29:pp 1~6. Yeager,L.E.1943.Storing of muskrats and other foods by minks. Journal of Mammalogy,24:pp 100-101. Youngman,P.M.1975.Mammals of the Yukon Territory. Museums of Canada,Publications in Zoology No.10. Zasada,J.C.and R.A.Densmore.1977.Changes in seed viability during storage for selected salicaceae.Seed Science Technology, 5:pp 509~518. - ."""', ""'" -. - Zasada,J.C.and L.A.Viereck.1975. strat ifi cati on on fermi nat ion Salicaceae in interior Alaska. Research,5:pp 333-337. The effects of temperature and in selected members of the Canadi an Journa 1 of Forestry ~l Zhigunov,P.S. Russian). Jerusalem. (ed).1968.Reindeer Husbandry.(Translated from Israel program for scientific translations, - ..- - - - .... .; ( SUPPLEMENTAL REFERENCES -WILDLIFE Ansell,A.and W.Smith.1980.Raptor protection activities of the Idaho Power Company.P.56-70 in R.P.Howard and .J.F.Gore (eds ~).A workshop on raptorsand energy developments •Idaho Chap.Wildlife Soc.Rep.No.1.Boise,Idaho.p 125. Benson,P.Co 1980.A study of large raptor electrocution and power- pol e util ization in six western states.P.34-40 in R.P.Howard and J.F.Gore (eds.).A workshop on raptors and energy develop- ments.Idaho Chap.Wildl.Soc.Rep.·No.1.Boise,Idaho.p 125. Bent,A.C.1937.Life histories of North American birds of prey. Part 1.U.S.Natl.Mus.Bull.No.167. Bente,P.J.1981.Nesting behavior and hunting activity of the gyrfalcon,Falco rusticolus,in south central Al aska.Unpubl. M.S.Thesis,Univ.Al aska,Fairbanks.p 103. Brown,L.H.andD.Amadon.1968.Eagles,hawks and falcons of the world.2 Volumes.Country Lie Books,London.. Boyce,D.A ••,Jr.,L.Fisher,W.E.Lehman,R.Hipp,and J.Peterson. 1980.Prairie Falcons nest on an artificial ledge.Raptor Res. Vo 1 •.14. Cade,T.J.1960.Ecology of the peregrine and gyrfalcon populations ;n Al aska.Univ.Cal ifornia Publ.Zool.63:151-290. Cade,T.J.,J.L.Lincer,C.M.White,D.G.Roseneau and L.G.Swartz. 1971.DOE residents.and egg shell changes in Al askan hawks and falcons~Science 172 (3986):955-957. Call,M.1979.Habitat management guides for birds of prey.U.S. Bureau of Land Management,Tech.Rep.No.TIN 338.Denver, Co lor ad 0 •p 70.. Cugnasse,J.M.1980.Adoption d'une a;re artificielle par un couple de Faucons pelerins et note sur 1 a maturite sexualle de la femelle.Nos Oiseaux 35 (378):238-242. Fyfe,R.W.,and H.I.Armbruster.1977.Raptor research and management in Canada.In:World Conference on Birds of Prey,Report of Proceedings.R.D.Chancellor (ed.).International Council for Bird Preservation.pp 282-293. Hagen,Y.1952.The gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus L.);n Dovre,Norway. Skrifter Utigitt av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi.I. Mat-Naturv.Klasse,No.3.p 37 . Haugh,J.R.and K.C.Halperin.1976.Evaluation of raptor popula- tions:Portage G1 acier area,Dena1 i Highway area,Yukon River pipe1 ine crossing area,and Yukon River and Porcupine River tributaries.Unpub1.rep.to Bureau Land Managanent,Anchorage, A1 aska.p 58. Howard,R.P.and JJ.Gore (eds.).1980.A workshop on raptors and energy developnent.Publication No.PB80-201205 (ICTWS No.1), Nat.Tech.Info.Surv.,Sprinfie1d,VA.p 125. - - Nelson,M.1980.Historic overview of raptor-powerline problems and raptor managanent priorities.P.6-8 in R.P.Howard and J.F. Gore (eds.).A workshop on raptors and energy developments. Idaho Chap.Wildl.Soc.Rep.No.1.Boise,Idaho.p 125. Nelson,M.W.,and P.Nelson.1977.Powerlines and birds of prey.In: Wor1 d Conference on Bi rd s of Prey,Report of Proceed ings.R.D. Chancellor (ed.).International Council for Bird Preservation. pp 228-242. Olendorff,R.R.,A.D.Miller and R.N.'Lehman.1981.Suggested prac- tices for raptor protection on power 1 ines.The state of the art .in 1981.Raptor Res.Rep.No.4.p 111. Mosher,J.A.and eM.White.1976.Directional exposure of golden eagle nests.Can.Field-Nat.90:356-359. Muir,R.D.1973.A study of the breeding biology of arctic gyrfal- cons.Unpubl.Rep.,Can.Wildl.Serv.,Ottawa,Ontario.p 81. Ne1 son,M.W.1978.Preventing electrocution deaths and the use .of nesting platforms on power lines.In:Bird of Prey Managanent Techniques.T.A.Geer (ed.).British Falconers'Club.pp 42-46. Lee,J.M.,Jr.1980.Raptors and the Proceed ings of the Raptors and R.P.Howard and J.Gore (ed s .). Society. BPA transmission system.In: Energy Deve10pnent Symposium. Idaho Chapter of the Wildlife - -. - Platt,J.B.1976.Gyrfalcon nest site selection and winter activity in the western Canadian arctic.Can.Field-Nat.90:338-345. Roseneau,D.G ..1972.Summer distribution,numbers,and feeding habits of the gyrfalcons (Falco rusticolus L.)on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska.Unpubl.M.S.Thesis,Univ.Alaska,Fairbanks.p 124. Roseneau,D.G.and J.A.Curatolo.1976.Distribution and movements of the Porcupine caribou herd in northeastern Al aska and Yukon Territory,1975.Arctic Gas Biol.Rep.Sere 36(1).p 82. Roseneau,D.G.,C.E.Tull and R.W.Nelson.1981.Protection strate- gies for peregrine fal cons and other raptors along the proposed Northwest Al askan Gas Pipeline route.Final report by LGL Alaska Research~ssociates,Inc.to Fluor Northwest,Inc.p 328. Sherrod,S.K.,C.M.White and F.S.L.Williamson.1976.Biology of the bald eagle on ,llmchitka Isl and;Al aska.Living Bird 15:143-182. Walker,W.1977.Chlorinated hydrocarbon pollutants in Al aska gyrfal- cons and their prey.Auk 94:442-447. .....Ward,R.and M·.Wrabetz.1982 . Bureau of Land Management. Chappell.September 17. U.S.Department of the Inter i or, Personal communication to J. - - White,C.M.1974.Survey of the peregrine fal con and other raptors in the proposed Susitna River Reservoir impoundment areas.Unpubl. Interim Rep.to U.S.F.W.S.Anchorage,Alaska.p 3. White,C.M.and T.J.Cade.1971.Cl iff~nesting raptors and ravens along the Colville River in arctic Alaska.Living Bird 10: 107 -150. 1 1 I 1 j 1 }1 TABLE E.3.1:MITIGATION OPTIONS ANALYSIS STRUCTURE RECOMMENDED BY SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (ADF&G)AND THE U.S.FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS).DESIRABILITY or OPTIONS DECREASES",-fRoM TOP TO BOTTOM.EXPLANATIONS OR EXAWLES OF EACH OPTION AS DESCRIBED BY AGENCIES ARE SHOWN. OPTION I AVOIDANCE I MINIMIZAT ION REC TIfICA TI ON RESTRICTION COMPENSATION ALASKA DEPARTMENroF FISH AND GAME DEfINITION Avoid Impact by Not Taking a Certain Action -Keep as much existing'natural habitat as possible. -Maintain fish and game populations and critical habitat. Minimize Impacts by limiting Magnitude of Action -Maintain habitat diversity and the capacity of each system to restore itself naturally. Rectify Impacts by Rehabilitating Environment -Repair,rehabilitate or restore abused aquatic or terrestrial systems. -Restore the same functions or structure of habitats (unless concomitant restoration of animnis using that habitat is impossible). Reduce (or Eliminate)Impact Over Time by Maintenance -Operate and maintain mitigation measures to reduce impacts over time. Compensate for Impact by Substitute Resources -Create or restore fish ,wildlife and hab itatvalues, and resource use opportunities that were unavoidably lost. -Compensation by providing substitute resources or environments is least desirable;the preferred mode is on-site mitigation. U.S.FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE Modify Project Design to Avoid -No-project alternative is one mode. -Design modifications inaction type,magnitude,timing and locations are opt ions.. Modify Project Deign to Minimize Impacts -Design modifications in action type,magnitude,timing and location are options. Restore Damaged Environments -Reclaim disturbed sites by seeding,etc. -Res tack lost fish and wildli fe. Maintain Mitigation Effort to Reduce Impact -Monitor/repai r mit igat ion)features. -Train mitigation personnel. Replace Lost Volumes by Management or Replacement -Intensify production by management. -Initiate hatcheries;restocking programs. -lease or buy new lands for enhanced management. TABLE E.3.2:COMMJN AND SCIENTIFIC NAf>£S OF FISH SPECIES APPEARING IN THE TEXT """I SCIENTIFIC NAf>£ Petromyzont id ae Lampetra japonica Salmonidae Coregonus laurettae Coregonus pidschian Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Oncorhynchus keta Oncorhynchus kisutch Oncorhynchus nerka Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Prosopium cylindraceum S almo gairdner i Salvelinus malma Salvelinus namaycush Thymallus arcticus Osmer id ae Thaleichthys pacificus Esocidae Esox lucius Catostomidae Catostomus catostomus Gadidae Lota Iota Gasterosteidae Gasterosteus aculeatus Cott idae Cottussp. COMMON NAf>£ Arctic Lamprey Ber ing Cisco Humpback Whitefish Pink Salmon Chum Salmon Coho Salmon Sockeye Salmon Chinook Salmon Round Whitefish Rainbow Trout Dolly Varden Lake Trout Arctic Grayling Eulachon Northern Pike Longnose Sucker Burbot Threespine St ickl;:lb ac k Sculpin - - - 1 1 -)1 -I 1 1 ])1 1 1 ]1 TABLE E.3.3:C[J.1MERCIAL CATCH £F UPPER COOK INLET SALMON IN NLJ.1BERS Of FISH BY SPECIES;1960-1981,ADULT ANADR CNOUS INVESTIGATIONS;SU HYDRO STUDIES;1982 Year Chinook Sockeye Coho Pink Chtun Total 1960 27,512 923,314 311,461 1,411,605 659,597 3,333,889 1961 19.737 1,162,303 117,778 34,017 349,628 1,.683,463 1962 20,210 1,147,573 350,324 2,711,689 970,582 5,200,378 '1963 17,536 942,980 197,140 30,436 387,027 1,575,119 . 1964 4,531 970,055 452,654 3,231,961 1,079,084 5,738,285 1965 9,741 1,412,350 153,619 23,963 316,444 1,916,117 1966 9,541 1,851,990 289,690 2,006,580 531,825 4,689,626 1967 7,859 1,380,062 177,729 32,229 296,837 1,894,716 1968 4,536 1,104.904 470,450 2,278,197 1,119,114 4,977,201 1969 12,398 692,254 100,952'33,422 269.855 1,108,881 1970 8,348 731,214 275,296 813,895 775,167 2,603,920 1971 19.765 636,303 100,636 35,624 327,029 1,119.357 1972 16,086 879,824 80,933 628,580 630,148 2,235,571 1973 5,194 670,025 104,420 326,184 667,573 1,773,396 1974 6,596 497,185 200,125 483,730 396,840 1,584,476 1975 4,790 684,818 227,372 336,359 951,796 2,205,135 1976 10,867 1,664.150 208,710 1,256,744 469.807 3,610,278 1977 14.972 2,054,020 192,975 554,184 1,233,733 4.049,704 1978 17,308 2,622,487 219,234 1,687,092 571,925 5,118.041 1979 13,713 920,780 259,956 74,318 654,462 1,923,229 1980 12,497 1,584,392 283,623 1,871,058 387,078 4,138.648 1981 11,548 1,443,294 494,294 127,857 842,849 2,919.621 1979-1981;Preliminary data. SOURCE:ADF&G 1982a TABLE E.3.4:PHERSON POPULATION ESlIMATES AND CORRESPONDINGLY 95~~CONFIDENCE INTERVALS Of CHINOOK, SOCKEYE,COHO,CHUM AND PINK SALMON MIGRATING TO SUNSHINE,TALKEETNA AND CURRY STATIONS, 1981 -1982 1 Chinook Sockeye Coho Chum Pink Station 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 198Z Sunshine Station No.-49,400 1.33,000 152,000 19,800 45,800 263,000 431,000 49,500 444,000 Confidence 44,800 120,000 1.39,000 18,000 42,000 235,000 .408,000 46,400 408,000 Interval 55,000 1.50,000 167,000 22,000 50,400 298,000 456,000 53,100 487,000 Talkeetna Stat ion No.10,200 4,800 3,100 3,300 -28,tlmT ,~49,2Q&-~,3Btt)2,300 73,100- S/(J-'O ~O ~Lfj.'-,..«?.~.....~~ Confidence 8,500 4,300 2,800 2,800 18,400 1,900 70,500Zi' Interval ·12,800 5,400 .3,500 6,200 22,800 ~~2,943 75,800 Cuny Station No.-1·1,200 2,800 1,300 1,100 2,510 13,100 29,500 1,000 59,000 Confidence 8,500 2,600 1,100 700 1,810 ·11,800 26,800 700 43,700 Interval 16,500 3,100 1,'>00 2,500 4,000 14,600 32,800 2,100 65,400 Chinook migrations were underwayu prior to installation of sonar equipment and should only be considered as abundance indices during the per iod the equipment was operational. Source:ADF&G 1981a,Trent 1982 I ]] ••J 11 J I !,J .J J J I .J J J,~ )1 )I 1 1 "'i }1 '1 1 I 1 1 J 1 1 TABLE [.3.5:CHINOOK SALMON EXCAPEMENT COUNTS OF SUSITNA RIVER BASIN STREArlIS FROM 1976 TO 1982,ADULT ANADROMOUS INVESTIGATIONS,SU HYDRO STUDIES,1982. Year STREAH 1979 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Alexander Creek 5,412 9,246 5,854 6,215 a/a/2,546 Deshka River 21,693 39,642 24,639 27,385 a/i/a/ Willow Creek 1,660 1,065 1,661 1,086 i/1 ,3"5"7 592dl Little Willow Creek 833 598 436 324.s./'a/459 316~/ ,Kashwitna River (North Fork)203 336 362 457 a/557 156d/ Sheep Creek 455 630 1,209 778 a/1,013 527d/ Goose Creek 160 133 283 b/a/262 \140d/ Montana Creek 1,445 1,443 881 1,0'9"4£/a/814 B87E:/ Lane Creek b/b/b/b/0/40 47 Indian River 5'J7 3'9"3 IT4 2"[5 a/422 1,053 Portage Creek 702 374 14CJ 190 a/659 1,111 •Pra i ri e Creek 6,513 5,790 5,154 a/a/1,900 3,844 t, Cl ear Creek 1,237 769 997 804£/!I ~/982 , Chul itna Ri ver (East Fork)112 168 59 a/a/a/119d/ Chulitna River (MF)1,870 1,782 900 'a/a/i/644E:/ Chul itna River 124 229 62 a/a/a/100d/ Honolulu Creek 24 36 13 "J7 a/a/27{1/ Byers Creek '53 69 a/28 i/i/7d/ Troublesome Creek 92 95 i/a/a/i/36~/ Bunco Creek 112 136 a/5"8 i/i/198 Peters Creek 2,280 4,102 1,335 a/a/a/a/ Lake Creek 3,735 7,391 8,931 4,196 a/i/3,517 Talachulitna River 1,319 1,856 1,375 1,648 i/2,129 3,101 Canyon Creek 44 135 h/h/0/84 b/ Quartz Creek b/8 fi/fi/fi/8 fi/ Red Creek ~/1,511 3'[5 ~/~/749 ~ 1/1976-1980 counts -Kubik,S.W. ii/No total count due to high turbid water fi/Not ,counted c/Poor counting conditions ~/Counts conducted after peak spawning Source:Ireht-191:12 TABLE E.3.6 (Cont'd) Surve~Chinook Salmon Counted Stream Surveyed Date Mettlo Conditions Live Dead Total Lake Creek 8/2 Hel.Good 2,267 50 2,317 Camp Creek 8/2 Hel.Excellent 517 0 517 ~(Lake Creek drainage) Sunflower Creek 8/2 Hel.Excellent 743 0 743,.....(Lake Creek drainage) Lane Creek 7/12 Foot Excellent 47 a 47 ,~7/28 Foot Excell ent 40 1 41 li ttl e Willow Creek 8/7 Hel.Good 190 126 316-Montana Creek 8/5 Foot Good 829 58 887 Portage Creek 7/21 Hel.Excell ent 955 a 955 "...8/8 Hel.Excell ent 1,081 30 1,111 Prai re Creek 7/31 Hel.Excellent 3,782 62 3,844 Sheep Creek 8/7 Hel.Good 316 211 527 Spink Creek 8/7 Hel.Excellent 12 0 12- Troublesome Creek 8/12 He1.Excellent 34 2 36 Talachulitna River 8/1 Hel.Excell ent·3,101 a 3,101 Willow Creek 8/6 Foot Fair 506 86 592 .-Deception Creek 8/6 Foot Fair 212 17 229 (Willow Creek Drainage) ...... 1/Partial count;Mainstem Deshka from Trapper Creek to Forks;Trapper Creek not surveyab 1e. 2./Survey conditions on Deshka River and tributaries ranged from good to poor. SOURCE:TRENT 1982 TABLE E.3.7:APPORTIONED SONAR COUNTS BY SPECIES AND SAMPLING LOCATION 1981 -1982 River Chinook Sockeye Coho Chum Pink Station Mile 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 Sunshine Station 26 -900 340,000 124,000 33,500 33,100 46,500 29,200 113,000 493,000 Yentna Station 04 -1,200 139,000 114,000 17,000 34,100 19,800 27,800 36,100 447,000 Sunshine Station 80 -2,900 89,900 75,900 22,800 42,400 59,600 178,000 72,900 352,000 Talkeetna Station 103 -2,900 3,500 3,300 3,500 7,200 10,000 28,800 2,500 85,400 Source:ADf&G 1981a,Trent 1982 l .~.~I }J t I I ,I J I I I I .J J ! TABLE E.3.8:.COHO SALMON .lJVENILES,PERCENT INCIDENCE AT HABITAT LOCATION SITES ON THEMAINSTEM SUSLTNA RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARY MOUTHS BETWEEN COOK INLET AND DEVIL CANYON, NOVEMBER ,1980 TO MAY,1981 Percent Incidence Nov.Dec.Jan.Feb.Mar.~.Ma'y . Cook Inlet O.ObtoTalkeetna83.3 O.Oa 42.9 60.0 63.6 57.7 Tributary Mouth Sites 100.0 0.0 66.7 66.7 66.7 0.0 83.3 Mainstem and Slough Sites 50.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 Talkeetna to Devil Canyon 0.0 42.9 50.0 42.9 Tributary Mouth Sites 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 ~Mainstem and Slough Sites 0.0 75.0 66.7 50.0 - - a Extreme cold (_25°to -40°F)hampered sampling efforts during December,1980. b Hazardous ice ~onditions prior to spring breakup limited sampling efforts to three habitat location sites in April.1981. SOURCE:ADF&G 1981f TABLE E.3.9:COHO SALMON JUVENILES,PERCENT INCIDENCE AT HABITAT LOCATION SITES ON THE MAINSTEM SUSITNA RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARY MOUTHS BETWEEN CDOK INLET AND TALKEETNA, JUNE TO SEPTEMBER,1981 SOURCE:ADF&G 1981f - ~, ~, - ""'"I j ]J 1 1 1 1 1 1 i )) TABLE E.3.10:EUCHAL.ON SET t\lT CATCHES IN SUSlTNA RIVER ESTUARY, AD~l.T ANADRO~U~.!NVESTlGATlONS,_SU HYDRO STUDIES,1;182 Tide 1;L.ocation Fishing Time 21 Eu lachon Ca tch 5 J., Time 2;Sjte No.3;RM 4; Total Pre-Post-C.P.U.E.; Date Ht.Tn Out Min.Spawners Spawners Total (Pre-Spawners) 5/16 22.6 1214 1 4.0 1320 1350 30 42 0 42 1.15/16 22.6 1214 2 4.5 1200 1230 32 24 0 24 5/17 23.0 1333 1 4.0 1248 1322 34 72 0 72 1.55/17 23.0 1333 2 4.5 1348 1418 30 22 0 22 5/19 27.8 0344 1 4.0 0257 0327 30 47 0 47 1.25/19 27 .8 0344 2 4.5 0359 0429 30 27 0 27 5/20 28.0 1642 1 4.0 1557 1627 30 31 O.31 1.45/20 28.0 1642 2 4.5 1704 1734 "30 50 0 50 5/22 31.5 0532 1 4.0 0447 0517 30 60 0 60 1.35/22 31.5 0532 2 4.5 0546 0614 28 15 0 15 5/23 30.8 1906 1 4.0 1821 1852 31 38 8 46 0.75/23 30.8 1906 2 4.5 1921 1951 30 7 18 25 5;26 32.0 0825 1 4.0 0740 0810 30 32 1 33 1.05/26 32.0 0825 2 4.5 0840 0910 30 25 15 40 5/28 28.7 1014 1 4.0 0929 1000 31 2 3 5 0.45/28 28.7 1014 2 4.5 1029 1059 30 24 48 72 5/30 25.4 1245 1 4.0 1200 1230 30 1 4 5 0.15/30 25.4 1245 2 4.5 1300 1330 30 6 23 29 6/2 28.6 0344 1 4.0 0259 0303 4 98 1 99 17.96/2 28.6 "0344 2 4.5 0359 0403 4 45 0 45 6;5 28.2 1753 1 4.0 1711 1741 30 30 11 41 2.66/5 28.2 1753 2 4.5 1820 "1850 30 124 94 218 6/1 29.4 0634 1 4.0 0549 0619 30 4 63 67 2.56/7 29.4 0634 2 4.5 0649 0719 30 143 148 291 6/9 28.6 0741 1 4.0 0640 0710 30 0 2 2 0.0f'./Q ,1\n 0741 2 4.5 0736 0802 26 1 16 17 1/High Tide 2/Military Time Source:Trent 1982 3/Site No:1 (T14N R7W Section 5DAC) Site No:2 (T14N RlW Section 5 AAC) 4/River Mile 5/C.P.U.E.:Mean number of pre-spawners/net/ minute TABLE E.3.11:SEX COMPOSITION AND SPAWNING CONDITION OF EULACHON SAMPLED AT ~ VARIOUS SUSITNA RIVER LOCATIONS,ADULT ANADROMOUS INVESTIGATION, SUSITNA HYDRO STUDIES.1981. """I SPAWNING CONDITION 2/ Number (%) Date Location Sample Sex Ratio Males Females (R.M.)1/Size Males Females (M:F)Pre.Post.Pre.Post. 5/16 4.5 110 74 36 2.1:1 100 a 100 a 5/17 4.5 173 98 75 1.3:1 100 0 100 a 5/18 25.5 11 9 ·2 4.5:1 -5/18 28.0 53 42 11 3.8:1 5/18 28.5 106 85 21 4:1 5/19 4.5 103 51 52 1:1.02 100 0 100 0 ~ 5/19 25.5 117 61 56 1.1:1 5/20 4.5 151 82 69 1.2:1 100 .a 100 a 5/20 36.7 47 37 10 3.7:1 100 a 100 a 5/20 40.4 8 6 2 3:1 100 a 100 a 5/20 40.5 16 12 4 3:1 100 a 100 0 5/21·25.5 360 211 149 1.4:1 100 0 98.0 2.0 5/22 25.5 100 42 58 1:1.4 92.9 7.1 84.5 15.5 5/23 20.5 119 22 97 1:4.4 100 a 88.7 11.3 5/23 21.9 144 132 12 11:1 5/23 16.3 148 112 36 3.1:1 96.4 3.6 94.4 5.6 5/24 25.5 139 87 52 1.7:1 100 a 53.9 46.1 -., 5/25 25.5 104 80 24 3.3:1 76.2 23.8 79.2 20.8 5/25 27.0 356 352 4 88:1 92.3 7.7 75.25 5/25 26.5 84 78 6 13:1 79.5 20.5 50 50 5/26 4.5 114 52 62 1:1.2 94.2 5.8 88.7 11.3 5/26 8.5 32 10 22 1:2.2 90 10 59.1 40.9 5/26 10.8 66·34 32 1.06:1 91.2 8.8 96.9 3.1 r"i'!'" 5/26 13.15 lS~",12 3 1.4:1 66.7 33.3 100 a 5/26 16.35 203 119 84 1.4:1 88.2 11.8 100 a 5/26 18.3 222 200 22 .9.1:1 85.5 14.5 95.5 4.5 5/26 19.5 112 92 20 45:1 56 44 80 20 ~, 5/26 22.5 100 49 51 1:1.04 75.5 24.5 98 2 5/27 25.5 105 40 65 1:1.7 47.5 52.5 100 a 5/28 16.3 105 73 32 2.3:1 38.4 61.6 100 a ~~ 5/28 18.5 115 113 2 56.5:1 70.8 29.2 50 50 5/28 25.5 145 77 68 1.1:1 84.4 15.6 91.2 8.8 5/29 27.0 244 236 8 29.5:1 80.1 19.9 50 50 5/30 22.8 73 38 35 1.1:1 65.8 34.2 97.1 2.9 ~'JJ'! 5/30 24.8 10 10 a 40 60 5/30 16.3 103 92 11 8.3:1 68.5 31.5 90.9 9.1 5/30 18.5 117 117 a 83.8 16.2 5/30 19.8 25 16 9 1.8:1 68.7 31.3 33.3 66.7 5/31 25.5 65 59 6 9~8:1 5/31 26.5 124 123 1 123:1 5/31·25.8 46 45 1 45:1 80 20 100 0 ~: 5/31 25.9 45 43 2 21.5:1 48.8 51.2 a 100 - SOURCE:.TRENT 1982 ~ f"""TABLE E.3.11 (Cont'd) Females Pre..Post. SPAWNING CONOTTION 21 (%) Males Post.Pre. Sex Ratio (M:F) Number Males Females Location Sample (R.M.)11 Size Date 6/1 16.3 486 255 231 1.1:1 98.8 1.2 100 6/1 18.5 214 112 102 1.1:1 98.2 1.8 100 6/1 19.5 209 112 97 1.1:1 100 a 100 a 6/1 21.0 259 174 85 2.04:1 97.1 2.9 98.8 1.2· 6/1 21.0 265 174 91 1.9:1 97.1 2.9 98.9 1.1 6/1 25.5 143 103 40 2.6:1 97.1 2.9 100 a 6/2 25.5 109 55 54 1.02:1 96.4 3.6 100 a 6/2 30 .1 179 84 95 1:1.3 100 a 100 a 6/2 36.8 104 49 55 1:1.1 100 a 100 a 6/2 41.4 236 105 131 1:1.2 100 a 100 a ~~6/2 45.8 6 3 3 1:1 100 a 100 0 6/2 47.9 17 9 8 1.1:1 6/3 25.5 216 106 110 1:1.04 100 a 98.2 1.8....6/3 36.8 155 93 62 1.5:1 100 a 100 a 6/3 38.4 3 2 1 2:1 ,.6/3 41.4 139 71 68 1.04:l'100 a 100 a 6/3 44.0 143 85 58 1.4:1 100 a .100 a..-6/4 36.8 156 85 71 1.2:1 95.3 4.7 100 a 6/4 41.4 136 88 48 L8:1 100 a 100 a 6/4 25.5 187 111 76 1.5:1 100 a 100 0 6/4 45.0 147 106 41 2.6:1 99.1 fl.9 97.6 2.4 6/4 48.0 145 99 46 2.1:1 100 a 97.8 2.2 6/5 9.5 156 71 85 1:1.2 33.8 66.2 70.6 29.4 6/5 15.0 104 82 22 3.7:1 85.4 14.6 86.4 13.6.-6/5 25.5 167 68 99 1:1.4 75.0 25.0 76.7 30.3...;. 6/5 27.9 .171"112 65 1.7:1 77.7 22.3 32.3 67.7 6/5 31.0 145 72 73 1:1.01 pIIlllll 6/5 31.8 193 92 101 1:1.1 6/6 15.0 314 288 26 11.1:1 81.6 18.4 61.5 38.5 6/6 16.3 212 142 70 2:1 82.4 17.6 92.9 7. 1 6/6 25.5 143 85 58 1.5:1 44.7 55.3 55.2 44.8 6/7 35.5 161 98 63 1.5:1 63.3 36.7 95.2 4.8 6/7 47.3 17 15 2 7.5:1 0 100 100 0 6/8 18.3 150 144 6 24:1 51.4 48.6 83.3 16.7 r-6/8 20 94 90 4 22.5:1 48.9 51 !'r 100 6/8 21.7 62 59 3 19.6:1 0 100 66.7 33.3 6/8 31.2 7 5 2 2 .5:1 r-6/9 15.0 156 145 11 13.2:1 26.9 73.1 a 100 1/River Mile 2/Pre-spawning condition:gravid Post-spawning condition:spent SOURCE:TRENT 1982 .TABLE E.3.12:ARCTIC lJlAYLING HOOK AND LINE TOTAL CATCH BY TRIBUTARY BETWEEN THE MOUTH AND fflOPOSED IMPOUNCMENT ELEVATIONS (PIE*) AND MONTH IN THE IMPOUNCMENT STUDY AREA,1981 (ADAPTED FROMADF&G 19819) ~. CATCH TRIBUTARY MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTE~iBER TOTAL """ Fog Creek 22 17 23 5 5 72 Tsusena Creek 23 19 74 18 1 135 Deadman Creek 53 86 42 6 3 190 """ ~Jatana Creek 1 49 16 172 28 266 Kos i na Creek 136 246 143 67 187 779 ~ Jay Creek 3 178 70 16 50 317 -Goose Creek 121 136 82 37 6 382 Oshetna River 19 92 155 73 167 506 "'1 TOTAL CATCH 378 823 605 394 447 2,647 *PIE for Fog and Tsusena Creeks =1455 ft;all other tributaries =2185 ft.- SOURCE:ADF&G 1981f - 3 13 ARCTIC C1lAYLING PoPULATION ESTIMATES FOR TRIBUTARIES TABLE Eo.:IN THE IMPOUNDt-£NT STUDY AREA,(ADAPTED FROM ADF &G 1981 g)* POPULATION CONFIDENCE** STREAM ESTIMATE INTERVAL ,- Fog Creek 176 115-369 Tsusena Creek 1,000 743-1,530 Deadman Creek 979 604-2,575 Kosina Creek 2,787 2,228-3,720 Jay Creek 1,089 868-1,462 Goose Creek 1,327 1,016-1,913 Oshetna River 2,017 1,525-2-,976 *Watana Creek estimate is not included because the number of recaptures was too low. -**Based on June through September recoveries. -SOURCE:ADF&G 1981 f ..... TABLE E.3.14:EffECTS OF SURFACING AND EARTHWORK ON PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF AQUATIC HABITAT (MODIFIED FROM DARNELL ET AL.1978) Construction Activity/Rock ~upgrade Aggregate Equipment Borrow Pits Long-Ierm Physical and Chemical [ffeels Cleaninq Earthwork Excavation Stabilization Production Areas &Landfills Effects Increased Surface Runoff X X X X X X X Lowering of Water Table X X X Leaching of Soil Mineral X X Fluctuation in Streamflow X X X X X X Fluctuation in Water Level X X X X X X Downstream Flooding X X X X X Increased Sedimentation X X X X X X Reduced Habitat Diversity X X X X X X Increased Turbidity X X X X X X X Changes in Water Temperatures X X X X X Changes in pH X X X X X Changes in Chemical Composition X X X X X X X X Addition of Hydrocarbons X X Increased Oxygen Demand X X X X X I J 1 I j j 1 )J I .~]j I ,I I J I TABLE E.3.15 Increase in water*surface elevation during initial filling of Watana Reservoir. 1ST YEAR Increase In Month Rate (ft/day)WSEL (ft)WSEL (ft) APR 1460 MAY 5.4 1626 166 JUN 2.4 1699 73 JUL 4.0 1823 124 AUG 0.9 1851 28 SEPT 0.6 1868 17 OCT 0.2 1875 7 Total increase in water surface elevation for the year is 415 ft "'-:l.-~ " 1'-1 2ND YEAR Increase In Month Rate (ft/day)WSEL (ft)WSEL (ft) ~ MAR 1875 APR <0.1 1876 1 MAY 1.0 1907 31 JUN 2.5 1983 76 JUL 1.7 2036 53 AUG 0.8 2062 26 SEPT 0.3 2070 8 OCT 0.3 2079 9 NOV 0.1 2082 3 DEC <0.1 2083 1 Total increase in water surface elevation for the year is 208ft 3RD YEAR Increase In Month Rate (ft/day)WSEL (ft)WSEL (ft) 'i~MAR 2083 APR <0.1 2084 1 MAY 0.5 2100 16 JUN 1.3 2140 40 JUL 1.0 .2172 32 AUG 0.4 2185 13 ~,- Total increase in water surface elevation for the year is 102 ft *Under median flow conditions. TABLE E.3.16:IMPORTANT TRIBUTARIES INUNDATED BY WATANA RESERVOIR mi. Deadman Creek (RM 186.7)2.3 Watana Creek (RM 194.1)10 Kosina Creek (RM 206.9)4.2 ~, Jay Creek (RM 208.6)3.2 Goose Creek (RM 231.2)1.2 Oshetna River (RM 233.5)2.0 ~- J 1 1 -,1 J I J 1 J ]J J TABLE E.3.16a:MAJOR IMPACT ISSUES DURING FILLING OF WATANA RESERVOIR REGARDING SALMONIDS IN THE TALKEETNA-TO-DEVIL CANYON REACH (0 -NO IMPACT, +=BENEFICIAL IMPACT,-=ADVERSE IMPACT t BLANK =NOT PRESENT IN THE HABITAT CONSIDERED) ~eauced Slough Reduced Increased Decreased Passage Passage +Mainstem Ground-Rearing Winter Summer Decreased Decreased Downstream Downstream Into Into Spawning Water in Water Water Mainstem Mainstem Passage in Passage From Seecies I Slouqhs Tributaries Habitat UpwellinQ Mainstem Temperature Temperature Turbiditv Scourinq Mainstem SloUQhs Chum Salmon -Adult I -a -Embryo --+ -Juvenile a -a a Sockeye Salmon -Adult -Embryo -Juvenile I -a a +0 Chinook Salmon -Adult a 0 -Juvenile a a -+ +-++a a Coho Salman -Adult a 0 - -Juvenile a 0 -+ +-++0 a Pink Salmon -Adult I -a -E.mbryo a -+ -Juvenile -a -a Rainbow Trout -Adult I -a a a ++-++a 0 -Juvenile a 0 a + +-++0 a TABLE £.3.17 Comparison of average monthly streamflows at Gold Creek during initial filling of Watana Reservoir.* Month Pre-Project Proposed Minimum Forecast Streamflows (ds)(cfs)1st yr %Change 2nd yr %Change 3rd yr %Change (ds)(ds)(cfs) OCT 5800 2000 5800 0 4300 -26 2000 -66 NOV 2600 1000 2600 0 2600 0 1500 -42 DEC 1800 1000 1800 0 1800 0 1300 -28 JAN 1500 1000 1500 0 1500 0 1300 -13 FEB 1200 1000 1200 0 1200 0 1200 0 MAR 1100 1000 1100 0 1100 0 1100 0 APR 1400 1000 1400 0 1200 -14 1200 -14 MAY 13200 6000 9800 -26 6000 -55 6000 -55 JUN 27800 6000 22200 -20 6000.-78 6800 -76 JUL 24400 6500 7300 -70 6500 -73 6500 -73 AUG 22200 12000 16800 -24 12000 -46 14100 -36 SEPT 13300 9300 9300 -30 9300 -30 13300 0 AVERAGE ANNUAL 9700 4000 6900 -29 4500 -54 4700 -52 *Under median flow conditions. t ••.J ,!t J J J I .~I }I I .~,I '. t ~-;f..)1 '), ';II! -c-~ I ')1 )J j J TABLE E.3.18 Comparison of average monthly streamflows at Sunshine Station during initial filling of Watana Reservoir.* Month Pre-Project Proposed Minimum Forecast Streamflows (ds)(cfs)1st yr %Change 2nd yr %Change 3rd yr %Change (cfs)(ds)(ds) _.,==='"- OCT 13700 10100 13700 0 12400 -9 10100 -26 NOV 5800 4400 5800 0 5800 0 4900 -16 DEC 4200 3400 4200 0 4200 0 3700 -12 JAN 3500 3000 3500 0 3500 0 3300 -6 FEB 3000 2700 3000 0 3000 0 3000 0 MAR 2600 2500 2600 0 2600 0 2600 0 APR 3200 2800 3200 0 3000 -6 3000 -6 MAY 27700 20400 24200 -13 20400 -26 20400 -26 JUN 64200 42300 58500 -9 42300 -34 43100 -33 JUL 63200 45800 46600 -26 45800 -28 45800 -28 AUG 55900 46400 51200 -8 46400 -17 48500 -13 SEPT 32300 28400 28400 -12 28400 -12 32300 0 AVERAGE ANNUAL 23300 17700 20400 -12 18200 -22 18400 -21 -- *Under median flow conditions. TABLE E.3.19 Comparison of average monthly streamflows at Susitna Station during initial filling of Watana Reservoir.* Month Pre-Project Proposed Minimum Forecast Streamflows (cfs)(cfs)1st yr %Change 2nd yr %Change 3rd yr %Change (cfs)(cfs)(cfs) OCT 30100 26400 30100 0 28700 -5 26400 -12 NOV 12700 11200 12700 0 12700 0 11700 -8 DEC 8200 7400 8200 0 8200 0 7700 -6 JAN 7900 7500 7900 0 7900 0 7800 -1 FEB 7000 6800 7000 0 7000 0 7000 0 MAR 6300 6200 6300 0 6300 0 7000 0 APR 7000 6600 7000 0 6800 -3 6800 -3 MAY 60500 53100 56900 -6 53100 -12 53100.-12 ,'•.,,~. JUN 123700 101800 118000 -5 101800 -18 102600 -17 JUL 131900 114600 115400 -13 114600 -13 114600 -13 AUG 110800 101400 106200 -4 101400 -8 103500 -7 SEPT 66000 62100 62100 -6 62100 -6 66000 0 AVERAGE ANNUAL 47700 42100 44800·-6 42600 -11 40100 -16 *Under median flow conditions. I t 1\f j !,1 }.])}J )j 11 ,~ TABLE E.J.20:STREAM HABITAT AFFECT BY OPERATION OF WATANA RESERVOIR Mi of tributary inundated May-June Total Watana Creek .5 .7 Kosina Creek .4 .8 Jay Creek .4 .8 Goose Creek .J .8 Osletna River .6 1.6 ~ I""'k', I ,~ TABLE E.3.21:MAJOR IMPACT ISSUES DURING OPERATION OF WATANA RESERVOIR REGARDING SALMONIDS IN THE TALKEETNA-TO-DEVIL CANYON REACH (0 -NO IMPACT, +=BENEFICIAL IMPACT,-=ADVERSE IMPACT,BLANK =NOT PRESENT IN THE HABITAT CONSIDERED) Reduced Passage Slough Real'ing Over-Decreased Decreased Downstream Downstream Into Spawning in wintering Mainstem Mainstem Passage in Passage From SDecies Tl'ibutal'ies Habitat Mainstem Habitat Turbidit Scoul'in Mainstem Slou hs Chum Salmon -Adult -0 -Embryo -+ -Juvenile 0 0 Sockeye Salmon -Adult -Embl'yo -Juvenile I 0 +0 Chinook Salmon -Adult I 0 0 -Juvenile 0 0 ++++0 0 Coho Salmon -Adult I 0 0 -Juvenile 0 0 + +++0 0 Pink Salmon -Adult -0 -0 -Embryo 0 + -Juvenile 0 0 Rainbow hout -Adult I -0 0 0 +++0 0 -Juvenile 0 0 0 + +++0 0 !t ,j),t I ,~j )J I -.TABLE E.3.24:COMPARISON OF AVERAGE MONTHLY -STREAMFLOWS 'AT GOlD---CREEK STATION UNDER OPERATION OF WATANA DAM Month Pre-Project (cfs) Post-Project (cfs) %'Change OCT 5800 8000 +38 NOV 2600 9200 +254 ""'"DEC 1800 10700 +494 JAN 1500 9700 +547 FEB 1200 9000 +650 ~~MAR 1100 8300 +655 APR 1400 7700 +450-MAY 13200 10400 -21 JUN 27800 11400 -59,'''...., 'II~ JUL 24400 9200 -62 AUG 22200 13400 -40 SEPT 13300 9800 -26 ,- - TABLE E.3.28:COMPARISON OF AVERAGE MONTHLY STREAMFLOWS AT SUNSHINE STATION OF THE TWO OPERATIONAL WATANA AND DEVIL CANYON DAII,jS Month Watana Alone Watana/Devil Canyon %Change (cis)(ds) p$)rO\ OCT 16000 15800 -1 NOV 12400 12900 +4 DEC 13000 13600 +5 .".;. JAN 11700 12600 +8 ~<FEB 10600 11800 +11 MAR 9800 10700 +9 APR 9500 9800 +3 MAY 24900 23200 -7 "... JUN 47900 46200 -4 JUL 48300 47600 -1 AUG 47400 46800 -1 r-. SEPT 29000 29600 +2 "'''''' .- ~, - ~l 1))1J )~'I '1 l j TABLE E.3.30:IMPACT ISSUES AND PROPOSED MITIGATION FEATURES FOR ANTICIPATED FILLING AND OPERATIONAL ItfACT~TQ AQUATIC HABITATS,SUSlTNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS MlilliAllUN tlAIUKE uev 11 Lanyon IMPACT Watana Development Development Watana Development Devil Canyon Development ISSUE F illinq Operation Fillinq Operation F illinQ Operation F111inq Operation Passage of Adult X X X -Downstream release -Downstream release -Downstream release Salmon Adverse Impacts to Slough Habitat X X X -Downstream relase -Downstream release -Downstream release -Slough m0d 1ficat lOr -Slough mod1fication -Slough modification -Replacement habitat -Replacement habitat -Replacement habitat through modifica-through modification through modifica- tion of side of s1de channels tion of side channels channels Loss of Sidechannel X X X -Replacement habitat -Replacement habitat -Replacement habitat and Ma1nstem Salmon through modifica-through modification through modifica- Spawning Areas tion of side of side channels t ion of side channels channels Altered Thermal X X X Multiple level outlet Multiple level outlet Regime Gas Supersaturation X X Fixed Core valves Fixed core valves Inundation of X X Lake modification Lake modifi Tributary Habitat and restocking cation - prog ram stocking proQram Outmigration of X X X Downstream release Downstream release Downstream release Juvenile Anadromous Fish TABLE W1 PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN*(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLA I N (0),AND THE INTERT IE (I) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Pteridophyta Aspidlaceae ." - Dryopteris dilatata (Hoffm.)Gray Dryopteris fraqrans (L.)Schott Gymnocarplum ctryopferis (L.)Newm. Athyriaceae Athyrium filix-femina (L.)Roth Cystopteris frafi tis (L.)Bernh. Cystopterls mon ana (Lam.)8ernh. Matteuccia struthiopteris (L.)Todaro Woodsra alplna (Bolton)s.F.Gray Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense L. Equisetum fluviafile L.ampl.Ehrh. Equisetum palustre C. Equisetum pratense L. Equisefumsilvaticum L. Equisetum vari79atum Schleich. Equ I setum sp. Isoetaceae Isoetes muricata Our. Lycopodiaceae Lycopodium alpinum L. Lycopodium annotinum L. Lycopodium clavatum L. Lycopodiumcomplanatum L. Lycopodium seiago L.ssp.selago Thelypteridaceae Thelypteris phegopteris (l.)Stosson Gymnospermae Cupressaceae Juniperus communis L. Pinaceae Picea glauca (Moench)Voss Picea mariana (Mill.)Britt., Sterns &Pogg. Monocotyledoneae Cyperaceae Carex aquatilis Wahlenb. Carex b1selowll Torr. Carex capillaris l. ca;:ex canescens L. Carex conClnna R.Sr. Shield fern Fragrant shield fern Oak fern Lady fern Frag IIe fern Mountain fragile fern Ostr i ch fern Alpine woodsia Meadow horsetail. Swamp horseta iI Marsh horseta i I Meadow horseta i I Woodland horsetail Var i ega ted scour i .og-rush Horsetai I Qui II wort Alpine clubmoss St I ff c I ubmoss Running clubmoss Ground cedar Fir clubmoss long beech fern Common juniper Wh ite spruce Black spruce Water sedge Bigelow sedge Ha i rl ike sedge SiI very sedge Low northern sedge U 0 U U 0 U 0 U U D U U U D U 0 U U D u U D U 1 U U U U o - TABLE I'll PRELiMINARY LiST OF PLANT SPECIES lDENTIFIEDIN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER 8ASIN*(Ul, THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (D),AND THE INTERTIE (i) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982)(Cont'd) Carex fi I ifol ia Nutt. Carex farberi Fern. Carex lmesa L. Carex 10 II acea L. Carex media R.8r.ex Richards Carex "'iiieiii'b'ranacea Hook Carex podocarpa C.8.Clarke Carex rhynchophysa C.A.Mey Carex saxaf I I IS L. care;(spp. neocharis sp. Eriophorum an~ustifOI ium Honck. ErlopHorum sc eucHzerl Hoppe Eriophorum vaginatum L. Erlophorum sp. Scirpus microcarpus Pres1. lrlcnophorum caesplTosum (L.)Hartm. Gramineae (Poaceae) Agropyron borea I e (Turcz.)Drobov Agropyron caninum (l.)Beauv. AgroPyron macrourum (Turcz.)Drobov Agropron sp. Agros~ls scabra Wil Id. Arrostis sp. A opecurus a I pinus Sm. Arctagrostislatifol La (R.8r.)Griseb. Beckmannla syzlgacHne (Steud.)Fern Calamagrostiscanadensis (Mlchx.)Beauv. Calamagrostis purpurascens R.8r. Cinnalatifol ia (Trev.)Griseb.in Ledeb "Uaif'fh'"on I a I "fermed ia Vasey Deschampsia atropurpurea (Wahlenb.) Scheele"'" Deschampsia caespitosa (L.)Beauv. Festuca alfaica Trln. Festuca rubra L.Call. Hierochloe alpina (Swartz)Roem.&Schult. Hierochloe odorata (L.)Wahlenb. Phleum commufafum Gandoger Poa alpina l. ~arcflca R.8r. l'O'a pa I us+r I s L. Trisetum spicatum (l.)Richter Iridaceae Iris setosa Pel las Juncaceae Juncus arcticus Wi lid. Juncus castaneus Sm. Juncus drummondii E.Mey. Juncus mertensianus Bong. Juncus trlglymls L. Luzula campestris (L.)DC.ex DC. &Lam."'" Luzu Ia confusa l i ndeb. Luzu Ia mu I +If I ora (Retz.)lej. Luzula parviflora(Ehrh.)Desv. Luzula tundricola Gorodk. Luzula wahlenbergii Rupr. Thread-leaf sedge Sedge Shore sedge Sedge Sedge Frag i I e sedge Short-stalk sedge Sedge Sedge Sedge Spike rush Tal I cottongrass White cottongrass Tussock cottongrass Cottongrass Smai I-fruit bullrush Tufted clubrush Northern wheatgrass 'liheatgrass It/heatgrass Wheatgrass Tickle grass Bent grass Mountai n foxta i I Polargrass Slough grass BI uejoint Purple reedgrass Wood reed Timber oatgrass Mountain hairgrass Tufted hairgrass Fescue grass Red fescue Alpine holygrass Van i I I a grass Timothy Alpine bluegrass Arctic bluegrass Bluegrass Downy oatgrass Wi Id iri s Arctic rush Chestnut rush Drummond rush Mertens rush Rush Wood rush Northern wood rush Wood rush Smal I-flowered I'/oodrush Tundra wood rush Wahlenberg I'/oodrush U D U U U U U U o U 0 U U U 0 oo U o o o u U D U U U o U D U o U U U D U U U U 0 U U U U U 0 u U 0 U U U U U U U U U U TABLE W1 PRELiMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RI VER BASIN*(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (D),AND THE INTERT1E ()) (AFTER MCKENDR1CK ET AL.(1982)(Cont'd) Li Ii aceae LJ oyd ia serot ina (L.)Rchb. streptopus amplexifol ius (L.)OC. lofleldla cocclnea Richards Tofieldia pusilla (Michx.)Pers. Veratrum vlrlde Alt. Zygadenus elegans Pursh Orchidaceae Listera cordata (L.)R.Sr. Platantnera conval lariaefolia (F i sch.)Li nd I• Piatanthera dilatata (Pursh)Lindl. Platanthera hyperoorea (L.)Lindt. Potamogetomaceae Potamogeton epih¥drous Raf. Potamogeton til ITormlS Pers. Potamogeton gramineus L. Potamogeton pertoliafus L. Potamogefon roGbins!1 Oakes Spargan i aceae Sparganium angustifolium Michx. Dicotyledoneae Aral i aceae Echinopanax horridum (Sm.)Decne. &Planch. Setulaceae*** Alnus crispa (Ait.)Pursh AI nus s i nuata (Reg.)Rydb.-mnus fenudol ia Nutt. AI nus sp. ~a glandulosa Michx. Betula nana L. Betu Ia OCCTdenta lis Hook. Betula papyrifera Marsh. Borag!naceae Mertensia ~aniculata (Ait.)G.Don Myosotls a pestrls F.W.Schmidt Call itrichaceae Call itriche hermaphroditica L. Call ifriche ~L. CampanuI aceae Campanula lasiocarpa Cham. Capr i fo Ii aceae Linnaea borealis L. Sambuons callicarpa Viburnum edule (Mlchx.)Raf. AI P 1i I Y Cucumber root Northern asphodel Scotch asphodel False Helebore Elegant death camas Twyblade Northern bog-orcnis Wh i te bog-orch is Nortnern bog-orchis Nutta I I pondweed F iii form pondweed Pond weed Clasping-leaf pondweed Robb I ns pond weed Narrow-leaved burreed Dev ii's club American green alder Sitka alder Th i nIeaf alder Al der Res in bi rch Dwarf arctic birch Water birch Paper birch Tall bluebell Forget-me-not Water starwort Vernal water starwort Mountain harebe!I Tw j n-f lower Pacific red elder High bush cranberry u U 0 U U U U u U U uu U U U U U D I u U D o u U D U U D U D U U U u U U D - TABLE W1 PREL IMINARY LI ST OF PLANT SPEC IES IDENT IFI ED rN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVERBASIN*(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (D),AND THE INTERTIE (I) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AI..1982)(Cont'd) Caryophyll aceae D - Minuartia obtusiloba (Rydb.)House Moehringia lateritol ia (L.l Fenzl 5 I Iene acau I IS L. Stel lariacrossifol ia Ehrh. Stellaria sp... Wilhelmsia physodes (Fisch.)McNeil I Compositae (Asteraceael Ach i IIea borea lis Bong. Achil lea sibirlca Ledeb Antennaria alpina (L.l Gaertn. Antennaria monocphala DC. Anfennaria rosea Greene Arnica amplexT'Caulis Nutt.ssp.prima Magui re Arnica chamissonis Less.(1l Arnica frlglda C.A.Mey. Arn i ca I essi ng i i Greene Adem is i a a Iaskana Ryd b. Artemisia arctica Less. Arfem I s I a t I Ies i i Leden. Aster sibiricus L. t:r='T'§'eron acris .subsp.pol itus (L.l (E.FriesTSchinz &Keller Erigeron humuilis Graham Er I geronl onchopl'iy I lous Hook. Erigeron purpuratus Greene Hieraciumtriste WII Id Petasites friSidus (L.l Franch. Pefasltes saglttafus (Banksl Gray Petasites sp. Saussurea angustifolia (Willd.l DC. Senecio atropurpureus (ledeb.)Fedtsch. SenecIo lugens Richards. Senecio sheldonensis Pors. SenecIO trIangularis Hook Sol idago.multlradiata Alt. laraxacum sp. Cornaceae Seneaio sp Cornus canadensis L. Crassulaceae Sedum ~(L.l Scop. Crucjferae (Brassicaceal Draba aurea Vahl card"am"'"Triebel lid i fot i a l. Cardam/ne pratensls L. Cardamine umbel lata Greene Oratia nlval IS Ciljebr Draba stenoloba Ledeb. "'P'a"r"rfa n ud I cau I i s(L.)Regel Diapensiaceae Diapensia lapponica L. Alpine sandwort Grove Sand wort Moss campion Ch ickweed Starwort Merckia Yarrow S i ber i an yarrow Alpine pussytows Pussytoes Pussytoes Arnica Arnica Arnica Arnica AI aska wormwood Wormwood Wormwood Siberian aster Fleabane Fleabane da i sy Daisy . Fleabane Wool y hawkweed Arctic sweet coltsfoot Arrowleaf sweet coltsfoot Sweet coltsfoot Saussurea Ragwort Ragwort Sheldon groundsel Rag wort Northern goldenrod Dandel ion Ragwort Bunchberry Roseroot Draba Alpine bittercress Cuckoo f lower Bittercress Rockcress Rockcress Parrya Dlapensia U U U U U D U D U U U u U U U U U D U D I U o u U U D u U U U U D U U D U u U U U U U TABLE W1 PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RlVER BASINa/(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (Ol,AND THE INTERTIE (Il (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982)(Cont'd) Droseraceae Drosera rotundifol la L. Elaeagnaceae Shepherdia canadensis (L.)Nutt. Empetracene Empetrum nigrum L. Ericaceae Andromeda polifol la L. Arctostaphylos alpina (L.)Spreng. Arctosfaphylos rubra (Rehd.&WilsonlFern. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (l.)Spreng. Cass/ope fetragona (L.)D.Don .Ledum decumbens (Ait.)Sma I 1*** Ledum groenlandicumOeder Ledum sp. TOTSeI eu i ra procumbens (L.)Desv. Menziesia ferruglvea Sm. Oxycoccus microcarpus Turcz. Rhododendron lapponicum (l.)Wahlenb. Vacctnlum caesptfosum Michx. Vacclnlum ul iglnosum L. Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. Vaccinium sp. Fumariaceae Corydalis pauciftora (Steph.)Pers. Gentianaceae Gentiana glauca Pal I. Gentiana proplngua Richards. Menyanthes trltol lata L. Swerti a perenni s L. Geraniaceae Geranium erianthum DC. Haloragaceae Hippuris vulgaris L. Leguminosae (Fabaceae) Astragalus aboriginum Richards Astragalus alpinus L.** Astragalus umbel latus Bunge Hedysarum al p1num l. Luplnus arcticus S.Wats. Oxytropis campestris (l.)DC. Oxytropls hUddel son I i Prosild Oxytropis maydel I lana Trautv. Oxytropis nigrescens (Pall.)Fisch. Oxytropis viscida Nutt. Sundero Soapberry Crowberry Bog rosemary Alpine bearberry Red-fruit bearberry Bearberry Four-angle mountain heather Northern Labrador tea Labrador tea Labrador tea Alpine azalea Menziesia Swamp cranberry Lap Iand rosebay Dwarf blueberry Bog blueberry Mountain cranberry Blueberry Few-flowered corydalis Glaucous gentian Gentian Buckbean Gentian Northern geranium Common maresta iI Mi J k-vetch Mi I k-vetch Mi I k-vetch Alpine sweet-vetch Arctic lupine Fi el d oxytrope Huddelson oxytrope Maydelloxytrope Blackish oxytrope Vi sc id oxytrope uu U D U u u u U D U U D U D U U U U - - (Cont'd)..;..;;...;.;;;;.~~;:;,.;.;;;.;.;.,;...::..;.;,.-=.....;..;=-:...:..::..::.;.------------ TABLE W1 PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN*(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (D),AND THE INTERTIE (I) (AFTER MCKENDR I CK ET At-1982) Lentibulariaceae PinsuicuJa vi Ilosa L. Ofrlcularla vuJgarisL. Myricaceae Hairy butterwort ComlOOn bladderwort u u Myrica ~L. Nymphaceae Sweet gal e U D I Nuphar polysepalum Engerm.Yeltowpond lily U Onagraceae Circaea aLpina L. Epi lobium angustifol tum L. Epllobium latilol ium L. Ep i lob i um pa lustre L. Enchanter's nightshade Fi reweed Dwa rf f i reweed Swamp willow-herb D U D U D U Orobanchaceae Boschniakia rossica (Cham.&Schlecht. Fedfsch.Poque U D I Polemoniaceae Polemonium acutiflorum Wil Id.Jacob's ladder U D J Polygonaceae oxyria digsna (L.)Hil I Po ygonum lstorta L. Potygonum viviparum L. Rumex arcticus Trautv. Rumex sp. Portu I acaceae Mountain sorrel Meadow bi stort Alpine bistort Arctic dock Dock u U U U U Claytonia sarmentosa C.A.Mey.Spring-beauty U Primulaceae Androsace chamae,jasme Hu It Dodecafheon frigldum Cham.&Schlecht. Primula cuneifofla Ledeb Tr i enta Ii s europaea L. Androsace Northern shooting star Wedge-leaf primrose Arctic starflower u u U D r-o I Pyrolacaae Monases uniflora (L.)Gray Pyro Ia asar Itoll aMi chx. Pyrola grandlflora Radius Pyrol a minor L. Pyrola secunda L. Pyrota sp. Single del i~ht Liverleaf wintergreen Large-flower wintergreen Lesser wintergreen One-s ided wi ntergreen \~i ntergreen U D D U U U D Ranunculaceae Aconitumdelphinifol ium DC. Actaea rubra (Alt.)WII Id. Anemone~issiflora L. Anemone parviflora Michx. Anemone rlchardsonii Hook Anemore.sp. Caltha leptosepala DC. Monkshood Baneberry Anemone Northern anelOOne Anemone AnelOOne Mountain marsh-marigold U D U U U D U TABLE W1 PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN·(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN (D),AND THE INTERTIE (I) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982)(Cont'd)- Delphinium glaucum S.Wats Ranunculus confervoides (E.Fries) E Fries Ranunculus macounii Britt.(may be R.pacificus or something similar) Ranunculus nivalis L. Ranunculus occidental is Nutt. Ranunculus pygmaeus Wahlenb. Ranunculus sp. ThaI ictrum alpinum L. Thai ic+rum sparsiflorum Turcz. Rosaceae· Dryas drummond i i Richards. gryas integrifolia M.Vahl. ~ocfopeta I a L. Geum macrophyl lum Wild. Geum ross!i.(R.Br.)Sere LUeTkea pect inata (Pursh)Ktze. Potentllia bdlora Wi lid. Potentil la fruticosa L. Potenfilfa hyrarctica Malte Pofenti I la pa ustris (L.)Scop. Rosa aClcularls Clndl. ~s arctlcus L. Rubus chamaemorus L. Rubus idaeu$l. m:iOi:iS pedatus Sm. RUi:iii"S s p. ~isorba stipulata Raf. Sibbaldiaprocumbens t. Sorbus scopul Ina Greene Spiraea beauverdiana Schneid. Rubiaceae Ga I i um berea Ie l. Galium trifidum L. Gal ium triflorum f-1ichx. Sa I i caceae*** Populus balsamifera L. Popu I us fremu I 0 I.des Mi chx. Sal i x a I axens is (Anderss.)Cov Sal Ix arbusculoides Anderss. "saTTXarct i ca Pa fl. Salix barclayi Anderss. ~brachycarpa Nutt.-sanx fuscescens Anderss. Salix glauca C.... Sal ix lanata L.subsp.richardson I I ~ok)A.Skwortz. Salix monticola Bebb-sanx novae-eng I i ae Anderss. Sal ix phlebophyl la Anderss. saTlX"planifol ia Pursh ssp.pi anifol ia ~planlfol ia Pursh ssp.pulchra ~am.j Argus Salix polaris Wahlenb. Sal ix reticulata L. Sal ix rotundlfol ia Trautv. "saTTX scou I er i ana Barratt Sal ix sp. Larkspur Water crowf~ot Macoun buttercup Snow buttercup Western buttercup Pygmy buttercup Buttercup Arct i c meadowrue Few-flower meadowrue Drummond mountain-avens Dryas White mountain-avens Avens Ross avens Luetkea Two-f lower cinquefo i I ShrUbby cinquefoil Arctic cinquefoil Marsh cinquefoil Prickly rose Nagoon berry Cloudberry Raspberry Five-leaf bramble Raspberry Sitka burnet Sibbaldia Western mountain ash Beauverd spirea Northern bedstraw Small bedstraw Sweet-scented bedstraw Balsam poplar Quaki ng aspen Feltleaf wil low Littletree wil low Arctic wi llow Barclay willow Barren-ground wil low Alaska Dog wi II ow Grayleaf wi I low Richardson wil low Park willow Tal I blueberry wil low Skeletonleaf wit low PlaneJeClf wil low Diamondleaf wil low Po I ar wi I I ow Net I eaf wi I low Least wi II ow Scoular wi I low Will ow u o U U U U U U D U 0 U U U U U U U U D U 0 U D U U D U U U U U 0 U U D U D U U D U 0 U U U U 0 U u u U D U U u U U U U U D - .-~ TABLE I'll PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN*(U), THE DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLA l:-.l (0),AND THE I NTERT IE (I) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982 (Cont'd) Santalaceae Richardson boykinia U Leather-leaf saxi frage U Northern Grass-of-Parnassus U Kotzebue Grass-of Parnassus U Grass of Parnassus Northern black currant- - - Geocaulon I ividum (Richards.)Fern. Sax i fragaceae Boykin ia richardson i [(Hook.)Gray Leptarrhena pyro U fol ia (D.Don)Ser. Parnassla palustrls L. Parnassiakotzehuei Cham &Schlecht. Parnassia sp. Ribes hudsonianum Richards ""FIT5eS laxitlorum Pursh (may be R. ---grand ul os um) Ribes triste Pall. ~raga bronchial is L. Sax if raga davur i ca Wi II d. Saxlfraga fol lolosa·R.Br. Saxifraga hieracifol fa Waldst.&Kit. Saxtfraga Iyalill Engler Saxifraga oppositifolia L. Saxlfraga punctafaL. Saxifraga serpyl lifolia Pursh $axifraga tricuspldata Rbttb. Scrophulariaceae Casti Ile,ja caudata (Pennell)Rebr. Mlmulus gattatus DC. PedlcularlS capltata Adams Pediculariskanei Durand Pedlcularls~orrca Wirsing Pedicularis parviflora J.E.Sm.yare parv I f lora Pedicularis sudetica Wil Id. Pedicuiarisverticil lata L. Pedicularis sp. Veronica Americana Veronica wormskjoldii Roem.&Schult. Umbel I [ferae (Apiaceae) Angel ica lucida L. Heracleum lanatumMichx. Valerianaceae Valeriana capitata Pal I. Violaceae Viola epipsila Ledeb. ~langsdorffi Fisch. ViOT"a b i f lora L. ~sp. Nonvascular Plant Species Lichens Cetrari a cucu IIata (Bel I .)Ach. Cetraria Islandlca (L.)Ach. Cetraria nival is (L.)Ach. Cetraria richardsonii Hook. Cetraria spp. Cladonia alpetris (L.)Rabenh. Sandalwood Trail ing black currant Red currant Spotted sax i frage Saxi frage Foliose saxifrage Hawkweed-leaf saxifrage Red-stem sax ifrage Purple mountain saxifrage Brook sax i frage Thyme-leaf saxifrage Three-tooth saxifrage Pale·Indian paintbrush Yellow monkey flower Capitate lousewort Kane lousewort Labrador lousewort Lousewort Lousewort Whor led lousewort Lousewort AI P [ne speed wei I Wi I d cel ery Cow parsnip Capitate valerian Marsh violet Violet Violet Violet U D U D U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U u U D I U U U U U U U U U TABLE W1 PRELIMINARY LIST OF PLANT SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN SUMMERS OF 1980 AND 1981 IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN*(U). THE DOWNSTREAl-..1 FLOODPLA IN (D).AND THE INTERT IE (I) (AFTER MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982 (Cont'd) Cladonia mitis Sandst.U GI adonia rangrferina (L.)\'Ieb.U Cladonla spp.U Dactyl ina arctica (Hook.)Nyl.U Haemafomma sp.U Lobaria I inita CAch.)Rabh.D Nephroma spp.U Peltigera spp.U Rhlzocarpon geographicum (L.)DC.U Stereocaulon paschale (L.)Hoffm.U D Thamnolla vermicularls (Sw.)Schaer.U Umbi tlcarla sp.U Mosses - * CI imacium sp. Rypnum spp.and other feather mosses Paludella squarrosa (Hedw.)Brid.t pOltrichum spp. Pt!ium crlsta-castrensis (Hedw.)DeNot. Rhacomitrlum spp. Sphagnum spp. Vascular plant species nomenclature according to Hulten (1968)except where noted.Lichen nomenclature according to Thomson (1979).Moss nomenclature accord i ng to Conard (1979). **Nomenc I ature accord i ng to Wei sh (1974). ***Nomenclature according to Viereck and Little (1972). t Nomenclature according to Crum (1976). U U U U 0 U U 0 U D - TABLE W2 VASCULAR PLANT SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN AND DOWNSTREAM AREAS WHICH ARE OUTSIDE THEIR RANGE AS REPORTED BY HULTEN (1968)AND (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Upper Basin ExtensIons: - Equ [setum f I uviati Ie Lycopodiumselago ssp.selago Lycopodium complanatum Picee mariana'" Carex filifolia ~onia intermedia Luzu I a wah I enberg i I Veratrum vi r.i de Llstera cordata** PI atanthera conva II ar i aefol ia Platantherah¥perborea Platanthera dllatata Echinopanax horridum Senecio sheldonensis MyrIca gale* Ranunculus occidental is Potent!I la biflora Rubus idaeus* ~pedatus Pedicularis kanei kanei Pedicularis parviflora Potamogeton robblnsii Downstream Extensions: Echinopanax horridum Rubus idaeus""'''' "'5"CT'i"'i?us mI crocarpus Galium triflorum Alnus tenuifol ia Circaea alpina ACTaea rubra Ribes h~ranum*** ~a chamlssonls Swamp horseta i I Fir cl ubmoss Ground cedar Slack spruce Thread-leaf sedge Timber oatgrass Wahlenberg woodrush He Iebore Heart-Leaved tw i nbl ade Northern bog-orchis Northern bog-orchis WhIte bog-orchis Dev j I 's club Sheldon groundsel Sweet gale Western buttercup Two-f lower ci nquefo i 1 Raspberry Five-leaf bramble Kane lousewort Lousewort Robbins pond weed Devi I 's club Raspberry Small-fruit bullrush Sweet-scented bedstraw Thinleaf alder Enchanter's nightshade Baneberry Northern black currant Arn i ca *Viereck and Little (1972)include the upper Susitna River basin in the range of this .species. **This species was recorded by the third and small mammal survey group from the University of Alaska Museum. ***Viereck and Little (1972)include downstream area in the range of this species. TABLE W3 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED PLANT SPECIES*SOUGHT IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN SURVEYS WITH NOTES ON THEIR HABITATS AND KNOWN LOCALITIES (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Species and Habitat Smelowskia pyriformis Drury &Rollins North America endemic calcareous scree,talus,in upper Kuskokwim R.drainage Unofficial Status** Threatened species - - Aster yukonensis Cronq.Endangered species -----North American endemic river banks,dry streambeds,river delta sands and gravels Kluane Lake.Koyukuk River Montia bostockii (A.E.Porsild)S.L.Welsh North American endemic wet,alpine meadows,St.EI ias Mtns.,Wrangel I Mtns. Endangered species Endangered species Papaver alboroseum Hult.Endangered species Aiiiphl-Beringian well-drained alpine tundra,Wrangell Mtns.,St.Elias Mtns. Cook Inlet lowlands,Alaska Range Podistera yukonensis Math &Const. North American endemic S.-facing rocky slopes,grasslands at low elevations, Eagle area.Yukon border Smelowskia borealis (Greene)Drury &Rollins Endangered species var.vi Ilosa North American endemic alpine calcareous scree,Mt.McKinley Park,Alaska Range Taraxacum carneocoloratum Nels. North American endemiC alpine rocky slopes,Alaska Range,Yukon Ogilvie Mtns. Other Endangered Species Possibilities Cryptantha shackletteana Eriosonum flavum yare aquilinum ErySimum asperum yare angusfafum Endangered species Upper Yukon River Eagle,Alaska Upper Yukon River - -- *Species information and status from Murray (1980). **AII species are under review by the U.S.Fi sh &Wi IdI j fe Service for inclusion in the Endangered Species Act of 1973. TABLE W4 HECTARES AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA COVERED BY VEGETATIVE COMMUNlTY TYPES IN THE l'iATANA RESERVOIR AREA (r-'ODIF1ED FRCI'1 MCKENDRICK ET AT,1982,BASED ON MAPS ATA SCALE OF 1:250,000) ,~ Vegetative Community Hectares Percent of Total Area Forest 310,155 21.29 con i fer 300,931 20.66 woodland spruce 185,608 12.74 open spruce 115,001 7.89 closed spruce 323 0.02 deciduous 1,290 0.09 open birch 968 0.07 closed birch 323 0.02 Mixed 7,933 0.54 open 7,817 0.54 closed 134 0.01 Tundra 323,612 22.21 ~wet sedge 4,839 0.33 mesic sedge 183,834 12.62 herbaceous al pine 807 0.06 mat and cushion 51,690 3.55 mat and cush ion/sedge 82,442 5.66-, Shrubland 595,519 40.88 tall shrub 93,379 6.75 low shrubs 497,140 34.13,....birch 20,520 1.41 wi Ilow 10,645 0.73 mixed 465,975 31.99 1""',Un vegetated 227,497 15.62 water 34,715 2.38 rock 103,063 7.07 snow and ice 89,720 6.16 Total vegetated area 1,229,286 84.38 Total area 1,456,783 100.00 Category TABLE W5 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA AND PLANT SPECIES IN OPEN CONIFER VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICKET AL,1982) Averaqe Coverl1 * (percent) - - Total veg.etatlon Overstory (>10 em dbh) Plcea glauca Picea mariana Understory (2.5 -20 cm dbh) Picea glauca Plcea mariana Shrub layer (>0.5 m tall,<2.S.em dbh) Plcea glauca Picea mariana Ground layer «0.5 m tall) Mosses,unidentified Feather mosses Pti 1 ium spp. Empetrum nigrum Ledum decumbens "1J'aC'CTn I urn u I i 9 Inosum Vaccinium vitis-idaea Equisetum arvense Equisetum si!vaficum [,nnaea boreal Is Picea mariana ~agrostis canadensis White spruce Black spruce White spruce Black spruce White spruce Black spruce Feather moss CrOWberry Northern Labrador tea Bog 81 ueberry Mountain cranberry Meadow horsetai I Wood I and horseta i I Twinflower Black spruce BI uejo i nt 98 24 24 2 10 3 2 5 1 3 94 11 29 13 6 5 7 6 6 8 8 1 14 - *Number of areas sampled was 9. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. - - TABLE 1'16 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN OPEN BLACK SPRLCE VEGETATION/HABJTAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM McKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Category Average Cover** (percent) Total vegetation Overstory (>10 an dbh) Picea glauca 1""i'Cea mar 1ana Wh i te spruce Slack spruce 96 14 13 5 10 4 5 7 8 2 93 34 30 7 14 14 10 15 12 7 4 Feather moss White spruce Black spruce Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Bog blue berry Mountain cranberry Wood I and horseta i I Willow Black spruce Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Picea glauca ~marlana Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 an dbh) Picea mariana Black spruce Sal iz spp.Willow Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Mosses,unidentified Feather mosses CI adoni a spp. Empetrumnigrum Ledum decum ens ~nlum ullsinosum Vacc I n I urn v It Is-I daea Equlsetum silvaticum Sal ix spp. ~mariana - - ...Number of areas sampl ad was 3. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. TABLE W7:COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN OPEN WHITE SPRUCE VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Category Total vegetation Overstory (>10 an dbh) ~glauca Understory (Z.5 -10 an dbh) Picea glauca ATili:iS Slnuata Shrub layer (>0.5 m tall,<2.5 em dbh) P icea mariana A'Iii"US cns a Rosa acicu aris Ground layer «0.5 m tall) Feather mosses ptilium spp. Eguisetum arvense Eguisetum sUvaticum Llnnaea boreallS Betula glandulosa Rosa acicularis ~magrostls canadensis White spruce white spruce Sitka alder White spruce American green.alder Prickly rose Feather moss Meadow horsetail Woodland horsetail Twinflower Resin birch Prickly rose Bluejoint Average Cover** (percent) 100 35 35 11 3 6 4 1 4 3 94 30 24 11 6 15 6 5 23 00!'J\1 - *Number of areas sampled was 5. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. - ...... - Category TABLE we COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES 'IN WOODLAND CONIFER VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE *IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET Al,1982) Average Cover** (percent) Total vegetation Overstory (>10 em dbh) Pica glauca White spruce 99 Understory (2.5 -10 em dbh) Plcea mariana Black spruce Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 em dbh) Picea mariana .Black spruce 12 11 17· 15 Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Feather lOOsses SPha~num spp. Empe rumnigrum Ledum decumbens TeaUiii groenl and i cum ~njum uliginosum Equlsefumsilvaticum Rubus arcticus "R"i:i'5IiS chamaemorus Picea mariana Carex bigeiowl i ~spp. Feather lOOSS Sph agnurn moss Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Labrador tea Bog b'ueberry Woodland horsetail Nagoonberry Cloudberry 81ackspruce Bigelow sedge Sedge 93 5 62 8 5 5 23 10 15 5 3 7 6 *Number of areas .samp I ed was 6. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. TABLE W9 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED BALSAM POPLAR FOREST VEGETATION!HABITATTYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) - Category Average Cover** (percent) ,..,.." ""'"' -, 5 5 10 5 85 20 5 30 40 40 20 40 1 5 99 80 1 75 Wh !te spruce Balsan poplar Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Bog blueberry Mountain cranberry Bunchberry Bal sam popl ar Beauverd spiraea Balsan poplar Overstory (>10 em dbh) Pica glauca . "F'Oj5'iJ1 us ba I sam i fera Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Populus balsamifera Total vegetation Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 cm dbh) Populus balsamifera Balsan poplar Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Pti I i urn spP. Polytrichum spp. Emgetrum nigrum Le um decum ens ~njum u!lSlnosum Vacclnlum vlfls-Idaea Cornus canadensis Populus balsamifera Spiraea beauverdiana *Number of areas sampled was 1. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover. - - ..- I Category TABLE W1 D COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED BIRCH DECIDUOUS-FOREST VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE* UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Average Cover** (percent) Total vegetation Overstory (>10 em dbh) Pica glauca ~la papyrifera Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Picea glauca ~a papyrifera Shrub layer (>0.5 m tall,<2.5 em dbh) Plcea glallca ~a papyrifera Ground layer «0.5 m tal r) Pt if i urn spp. Polyfrlchum spp. Vaccinium ul i~inosum Vacci n lum vit I s-i daea Equisetum silvaticum Cornus canadensIs Calamagrostis canadensis Gymnocarplum dryopferlS Mertensia paniculata White spruce Paper bl rch White spruce Paper birch White spruce Paper bi rch Bog b I ueber ry Mountain cranberry Wood I and horseta i I Bunchberry Bluejoint Oak-fern Tal r bluebel r 99 73 8 68 9 5 3 3 1 3 95 15 5 15 5 10 16 38 20 10 "Number of areas samp I ad was 2. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampl ad. Category TABLE W11 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATiON.VERTICAL STRATA.AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED ASPEN DECIDUOUS VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN.SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Averaqe CoverJ * (percent) - Total vegetation Overstory (>10 em dbh) Betula papyrifera Populus tremuloldes Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Betula papyrlfera Populus tremuloldes Shrub rayer (>0.5 m tall.<2.5 em dbh) Picea glauca ~a papyrffera Betula glandulosa Rosa acicularis saTTx spp. POPUIu s tremu I0 ides Ground layer «0.5 m tal t) Ptll i urn spp. Polytrlchum spp. Ledum decumbens -vaccrn I um u I i 9 i nosum Linnaea borealis Corn us canadenSIS Mertensia paniculata Epilobium angustifolium Geocaulon I ividum SpIraea beauverdlana Vaccinium vitis-idaea Betula nana Viburnum edul is Lycopodium annotinum Lycopodium clavafum Paper bi rch Tremb ling aspen Paper birch Trembl ing aspen White spruce Paper birch Resin birch Prickly rose Wi Ilow Tremb ling aspen Northern Labrador tea Bog blueberry Twi nf lower Bunchberry Tall bluebell Fireweed Sandalwood Beauverd spiraea Mountain cranberry Dwarf arctic birch Highbush cranberry Sti ff cl ubmoss Runn i ng c I ubmoss 99 80 5 80 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 85 5 5 20 10 5 80 5 5 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 - - *Number of areas sampled was 1. **lncludes only those species with at least 5 percent cover. TABLE 1'112 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED MIXED CONIFER DECIDUOUS FOREST VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET'AL,1982) Category Average Cover** (percent) Total vegetation 98 50 33 35 8 3 4 4 3 88 40 3 8 24 13 7 30 White spruce Paper birch Crowberry Mountain cranberry Woodland horsetail Bunchberry· Nagoonberry Bluejoint White spruce Paper birch Overstory (>10 em dbh) Picea glauca Betula·papyrifera Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Picea glauca ~a papyrlfera Shrub layer (>0.5 m tall,<2.5 em dbh) ~gIauca Wh i te spruce Ground layer «0.5 m tall) Pti I ium spp. Empetrum nisrum vacclnlum vltls-idaea Equisetum silvaficum Cornus canadensis Rubus arcticus ~agros+ls canadensis ".... ,r-' *Number of areas sampled was 3. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover dn anyone area sampl ad • ..- Category TABLE W13 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION.VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN OPEN MIXED CONIFER DECIDUOUS FOREST VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE* IN UPPER SUS1TNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Avera~e Cover * (percent) Total vegetation Overstory (>10 em dbh) Picea grauca ~a papyrifera Understory (2.5 -10 cm dbh) Picea glauca tre'fLiTapapyr i fera Shrub t ayer (>0.5'm tall,<2.5 em dbh) Plcea glauca ~a papyrifera Sa I I X novae-ang I I ae Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Feather mosses Ptilium spp. Empefrum nigrum Ledum decumbens vaccrn I urn u I I~I nosum Vacclnlumvitls-Idaea Equlsefum Sl Ivaflcum Cornus canadensis Plcea glauca . Calamagrostrs canadensIs Gymnocarpium dryopferis White spruce Paper bi rch Wh ite spruce Paper birch White spruce Paper birch Tal I blueberry wit low Feather moss Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Bog blueberry Mountain cranberry Woodland horsetail Bunchberry Wh i te spruce 81 uejoint Oak-fern 100 38 20 12 7 5 1 17 2 2 11 79 18 34 6 6 16 9 3· 13 2 11 8 - - *Number of areas samp Ied was 8. **\ncludes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. - - - Category TABLE W14 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN WET SEDGE-CRASS TUN[RA VEGETATION/HABlTAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (fROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Average Cover** (percent) Total vegetation Sphagnum moss Aslaska bog wi II ow Bluejoint Water sedge 8 igel ow sedge Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 em dbh) Salix planifolia ssp.pulchra Diamondleaf willow Salixspp.Willow Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Mosses,unidentified Sphagnum spp. Sal ix fuscescens ~a9rostis canadensis Carex aquat iii s Carex 51gelow I I 99 13 8 5 86 20 22 5 14 ,38 23 - - ~Number of areas sampled was 3. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. Category TABLE W15 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN MESIC SEDGE-ffiASS .TUNCRA VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Averaqe Coveri * (percent) - ~, Total vegetation Ground layer «0.5 m tall) Polytrichum spp. Salix spp. Carex bigelowi i Carex sPP. Hairy-cap moss Willow Bigelow sedge Sedge 65 65 5 13 30 4 - *Number of areas sampled was 2. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampl ed. - Category TABLE '1116 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED MAT AND CUSHION TUNCRA VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUS/TNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Average Cover** (percent) - Total vegetation Ground layer «0.5 m tal t) Lichens,unidentified Cladonia spp. Empefrum nigrum Ledum decumbens ~nlum ul Iglnosum Arcfosfaphylos~ Betula glandulosa Betula·nana Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Bog blueberry Bearberry Resin birch Dwarf arctic birch 78 78 14 8 6 7 8 7 6 10 ".,. ,.... ..... *Number of areas sampled was 8. **Incfudes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. TABLE W17 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED TALL ALDER VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*'IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) Category Total vegetation Understory (2.5 -10 em dbh) Alnus sinuata ~crispa Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 cmdbh) Alnus sinuata 7iTii'US cr i spa ~sPp. Ground layer «0.5 m tal J) Equisetum silvaticum Klbes spp. ATi1US s i nuata ~agrostls canadensis Sitka alder American green alder Sitka alder American green alder Currant Woodland horsetail Currant Sitka alder Bluejoint Average Cover** (percent) 96 57 25 32 38 28 10 8 62 31 8 7 35 ...., *Number of areas sampled was 3. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled.- _. TABLE W18 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETATION,VERTICAL STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN CLOSED LaN SHRUB VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Feather moss Crowberry Northern Labrador tea Labrador tea Bog blueberry Mountain cranberry Red-fruit bearberry Resin birch Dwarf arctic birch - Category Total vegetation Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 ern dbh) Betula glandulosa Resin birch Sal Ix planifol ia ssp.pulchra Diamondleaf wil low Ground layer «0.5 m tall) Mosses,unidentified Feather mosses Empetrum nigrum [edum decumbeos Ledum groenlandicum ~nium ulisinosum Vacclnlum vlfls-Idaea Arcfostaphylos rubra Betula glandulosa Betula nana Average Cover** (percent) 93 42 10 8 52 17 6 7 18 4 8 8 6 34 9 - .-.. *Number of areas sampled was 10. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. TABLE W19 COVER PERCENTAGES FOR TOTAL VEGETAT ION,VERT ICAl STRATA,AND PLANT SPECIES IN OPEN lOW SHRUB VEGETATION/HABITAT TYPE*IN UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,SUMMER 1980 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982)- Category Total vegetation Shrub layer (>0.5 m tal I,<2.5 em dbh) Betula glandulosa Ground layer «0.5 m tal I) Feather mosses ledum ~roenlandicum ~nlum u"linosum Betula glandu osa Carex aquati I is Resin birch. Feather moss labrador tea Bog blue berry Resin birch Water sedge Average Cover** (percent) 100 17 5 83 13 5 15 15 43 - - -*Number of areas sampled was 2. **Includes only those species with at least 5 percent cover in anyone area sampled. TABLE W20 HECTARES AND PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA COVERED BY VEGETATIVE CCMMUNITY TYPES IN THE DEVILrs CANYON RESERVOIR AREA (MODIFIED FROM MCKENDRICK ET AT,1962,BASED ON MAPS AT A SCALE OF 1:250,000) 31,422 18.04 15,570 8.94 15,852 9.10 71,073 40.80 524 0.30 13,311 7.64 57,238 32.85 49,171 28.22 30,656 17.60 18,515 10.63 13,029 7.48 5,486 3.15 15,895 9.12 5,125 2.94 ·10,649 6.11 121 0.07 158,321 90.88 174,216 100.00 - - r Vegetative Community Forest coni fer wood I and spruce open spruce closed spruce deciduous open birch closed bl rch Mixed open closed Tundra wet sedge mesic sedge herbaceous alpine mat and cush ion mat and cushion/sedge Shrubland tal I shrub low shrubs birch wi Ilow mixed Unvegetated water rock snow and ice Total vegetated area Total area Hectares 38,077 6,655 2,783 3,872 Percent of Total Area 21.86 3.82 1.60 2.22 TABLE W21 PERCENT COVER IN EARLY SUCCESSIONAL STANDS ON DOWNSTREAM FLOOD- PLAIN OF SUSITNA RIVER,SUMMER 1981 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) - Category Physical Features Water. Bare ground Grave I,cobb I es Vegetation Categories Litter Stand I ng dead Perennial grasses Perenn i a I forbs Mosses Li chens Low shrubs Tall shrubs Trees Total vegetation Vegetation by Species or Genus Equisetum varie~atum Poyulus balsaml era Sa IX alaxensis Sa I i X novae-ang I lae-sanx arbuscu 10 idessarrxsp. 1i5Tr'agal us sp. Hedysarum sp. Calamagrostis canadensis Eriophorum sp. Sci rpus sp. Alnus tenuifolia ATii'iJS s I nuafa A?"fBrii1 s I a fe I es i I Nephroma sp. Var i egated horseta i I Bal sam poplar Feltleaf willow Tall blueberry willow Little tree wil low Willow •Mil k-vetch Sweet-vetch Bluejolnt Cottongrass Bull rush Th in leaf I'll der Sitka I'll der Wormwood Nephroma Mean (percent) + 53 2 13 + 1 25 + + 4 + 8 38 25a 4 1 + + + + + + + + + + + - ~, - ..- I TABLE W22 PERCENT COVER IN IMMATURE BALSN>1 POPLAR STANDS ON DOWNSTREN>1 FLOODPLAIN.SUMMER 1981 (FROM MCKENDRICKET AL,1982) - ..... i I - Category Phys i ca I Features Vegetation Categories Litter Standing dead Perennial grasses Perenn i al forbs Mosses Low shrubs Tal I shrubs Trees Total vegetation Vegetation by Species or Genus Populus balsamifera Alnus fenultol ta "'iUii"ij'S sin ua fa ~agrostis canadensis Viburnum edu Ie Arfemlsja~sii Reracleum lanafum Mertensia paniculata Rosa aclcularis ""P"T'Cei"a g I au ca Sa II x novae-ang Ii ae Pyrota secunda Pyroia sp. Rubus idaeus saii"QU'i sorba st i pu lata Galiumsp. Matteuccia struthiopteris Sfrepfopus amplexicaul IS Bal sam pop I ar Thinleaf alder Sitka al der 81 uejoint Hi ghbush cranberry Wonnwood Cow parsnip Tall bluebell Prickly rose White spruce Tall blueberry willow One-sided wintergreen Wi ntergreen Raspberry Sitka burnet Bedstraw Ostrich fern Cucumber-root Mean (percent) 95 + 23 9 + 6 48 62 91 62 40 8 23 3 3 1 1 3 + + + + + + + + + TABLE W23 PERCENT COVER IN BIRCH-SPRUCE STANDS ON DOWNSTREAM FLOODPLAIN,SUMMER 1981 (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) ,~ Category Vegetation Categories Litter Stand i ng dead Perennial grasses Perennial forbs Mosses Low shrubs Tall shrubs Trees Tota I vegetat ion Vegetation by Species or Genus Betula papyrffera Picea glauca ~·tenuifolia ""iliTilliS sin ua fa vrE'iJr"num edu Ie Ri bes sPP:-- ~acicularis ~magrosfls canadensis Dryopferls at latafa Gymnocarpium sp. Ecfiinopanax horridum Cornus canadenSIS Merfensla panlculata Rubus idaeus ~bium an¥ustifolium Ep I 105 I um I a I to I I um Sa II x novae-ang I i ae Rubus sp. Rubus arcticus .TrT'eii"ta lis europaea Paper birch Whi te spruce Thinleaf alder Sitka al der Highbush cranberry Currant Prickly rose BI uejoint Spinulose shield-fern Oak-fern Dev ii's club Bunchberry Tall bluebell Raspberry Fireweed Dwarf f j reweed Tall blueberry wil low Bramble Nagoonberry Arctic starflower Mean (percent) 100 + 18 44 1 40 14 52 93 42 12 10 5 19 5 20 18 7 4 4 1 1 3 1 + + + + + - - r~ - TABLE W24 HECTARES AND PERCENT OF TOTAL AREA COVERED BY VEGETATION/ HABITAT TYPES WITHIN THE HEALY TO FAIRBANKS TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AT.1982) Vegetative/Habitat Type*Hectares Percent of Total Area Forest 86,830 77.9 Woodland spruce 1,812 1.6 Open spruce 31,739 28.5 Closed spruce 1,347 1.2 Woodland deciduous 993 .9 Open deciduous 12,553 11.3 Closed deciduous 10,384 9.3 Wood Iand con i fer-dec iduous 961 0.9 Open confier-deciduous 12,502 11.2 Closed confier-deciduous 4,125 3.7 Open spruce/open deciduous 948 0.9 Open spruce/wet sedge-grass 1,993 1.8 open deciduous Open spruce/low shrub/wet 7,008 6.3 sedge-grass/open deciduous Open spruce/low shrub 465 0.4 Tundra 4,407 3.9 Wet sedge-grass 2,268 2.0 Sedge grass 277 0.2 Sedge shrub 566 .5 Sedge-grass/mat and cushion 1,296 1.2 Shrubland 17,199 15.4 low mixed shrub 15,405 13.8 wi llow shrub 58 .05 low shrub/wet sedge-grass 1,736 1.6 Agricultural land 175 .2 Disturbed 431 .4 Unvegetated 2,467 2.2 Lakes 196 .2 River 2,143 1.9 Gravel 128 .1 Total Area 111,509 100.0 *The Tanana Flat portion of the transmission corridor is an area of extremely complex mosaics of various vegetation types.As a result, various complexes were recognized. TABLE W25 HECTARES AND PERCENT OF TOTAL AREA COVERED BY VEGET ATI ON! HABITAT TYPES WITHIN THE WILLOW TO COOK INLET TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL,1982) Vegetative/Habitat Type* Forest Woodland spruce Open spruce Closed spruce Open birch Closed birch Open bal sam popl ar Closed balsam pop Iar Open conifer-deciduous Closed conifer-deciduous Wet sedge-grass Shrubland C!osed ta I I shrub Low mixed shrub Lakes Disturbed Total Area Hectares 25,851 2.457 3,402 3.226 16 3,638 100 172 1.697 11.143 9.123 2.213 92 2.121 1•0 11 381 38.579 Percent of Total Area 67.0 6.3 8.8 8.4 .04 9.4 .3 .5 4.4 28.9 23.7 5.7 .2 5.5 2.6 1.0 100.0 ~" - - - - ~J B!r.\ TABLE W26 HECTARES AND PERCENT OF TOTAL AREA COVERED BY VEGETATION/ HABITAT TYPES WITHIN THE DAM TO INTERTIE TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR (FROM MCKENDRICK ET AL.1982) - Vegetative/Habitat Type* Forest Woodland spruce-black Woodland spruce-white Open spruce-black Open spruce-white OpE;ln birch Closed bi rch Closed balsam poplar Open con i fer-dec iduous Closed confier-deciduous Tundra Wet sedge-grass Sedge grass Sedge shrub Mat and cush ion Shrubland Open ta I I shrub Closed tal I shrub Birch shrub Wr II ow sh rub Mixed low shrub Grassland Dl sturbed Unvegetated Lake River Rock Total Area Hectares 34,388 3,028 4,957 2,527 4,284 805 1,749 449 5,119 11,469 24,975 314 3,670 5,870 15,121 31,548 4,717 5,696 10,909 1,169 9,057 109 10 3,778 608 1,438 1,542 94,808 Percent of Total Area 35.3 3.2 5.2 2.7 4.5 .9 1.8 .5 5.4 12.1 26.3 .3 3.9 5.2 15.9 33.3 5.0 5.0 11.5 1.2 9.5 .1 .01 4.0 .7 1.5 1.7 100.0 TABLE W27 HECTARES OF DIFfERENT VEGETATION TYPES TO BE IMPACTED BY THE WATANA FACILITY COMPARED WITH TOTAL HECTARES OF THAT TYPE IN THE ENTIRE UPPER BASIN AND IN THE AREA WITHIN 16 KM OF THE SUSITNA RIVER Percent of Percent of Borrow Areas Upper Basin 16 km* Vegetation/Habitat Dam and Total For Area For Typ_~?I!IJI~ays Impoundment Camp Village Airstrip A D E f H I Total That Type That ~ 199 38 81 451 224 195 4 17 21 Forest Wood I and spruce- black Wood I and spruce- white Open spruce-black Open spruce-while Open birch Closed birch Closed balsam poplar Open OJn I fer- deciduous Closed coni fer- deciduous Tundra Wet sedge-grass Sedge-grass Sedge shrub Mat and cushion Shrubland Open talt shrub Closed tall shrub Birch shrub Willow shrub '~ixed low shrub Herbaceous Grass I and Disturbed Unveget ated Rock Snow and Ice River Lake 34 8 1 13 5 7 46 6 17 1 22 13 1 12 10784 3870 397 2864 169 325 460 3 1337 759 84 84 1719 227 287 443 66 651 45 2104 59 2007 38 63 34 29 62 35 27 8 8 17 13 4 181 53 180 179 16 71 2 62 5 32 47 70 8 8 70 81 224 1 1 12 4 88 75 124 2 2 69 11 121 106 34 15 19 11798 4297 537 3000 844 326 478 3 1480 833 162 92 70 2449 234 317 813 87 953 45 2128 62 2019 47 3.4 3.1 3.1 4.0 4.0 33.7 148.0** *** 6.4 5.2 0.1 1.9 0.1 0.4 0.4 2.4 0.8 0.2 0.8 0.1 13.7 0.2 8.3 6.8 4.0 10.6 8.0 21.8 20.5 0.5 15.4 6.3 0.1 2.6 0.1 1.4 1.5 2.0 1.9 1 .0 t.O 250.0 7.9 0.4 47.7 0.8 Total 93 14691 63 10 17 333 287 180 280 489 34 16537 1.0 3.6 *An area 16 km on either side of the Susltna River from Gold Creek to the mouth of the Maclaren River. **Hectares of closed birch are apparently greater tn the Impact areas than for the entire basin,because the basin was mapped at a much smaller scale,and many of the closed birch stands did not appear at that scale. ***Areas of this type were too small to be mapped at the scale of which the upper Susltna River basin was mapped. 'I J .1 I - -I I ~I J I I ]1 J J I J I 1 1 1 1 TABLE W28 )1 )1 j J HECTARES OF DIFFERENT VEGETATION TYPES TO BE IMPACTED BY THE DEVIL CANYON FACILITY COMPARED WITH TOTAL HECTARES OF THAT TYPE IN THE ENTIRE UPPER BASIN AND IN THE AREAS WITHIN 16 KM OF THE SUSITNA RIVER Percent of Percent of Upper Bas In 16 km* Vegetation/Habitat Dam and Borrow Total For Area For Type Spillways Impoundment Ca~Vll!Me Area K Total That Typ_e__lhat TYIle Forest Wood Iand spruce- black Woodland spruce- white Open spruce-black Open spruce-white Open birch Close birch Open balsam poplar Closed balsam poplar Open coni fer- deciduous Closed con I fer- deciduous Tundra Wet sedge-grass Sedge grass Sedge shrub Mat and cushion Shrubland Open tal I shrub Closed tall shrub Birch shrub Willow shrub Mixed low-shrub Herbaceous Grassland Disturbed Unvegetated Rock Snow and Ice River Lake Total 16 4 3 7 2 2 18 2289 133 20 300 329 57 439 6 8 279 727 11 11 70 2 1 49 '14 4 826 15 810 1 3 196 36 36 36 39 39 39 119 11 108 18 18 11 11 148 2 499 133 20 315 329 57 433 6 8 286 912 11 11 88 2 1 67 14 4 839 15 811 13 3 437 0.7 0.3 0.3 1.3 1.3 5.9 133.7** *** *** 1.2 5.7 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 5.6 0.1 0.2 1.8 0.2 0.2 1 .1 3.2 3.8 18.6 1.4 3.0 6.9 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 3.1 0.1 19.2 0.2 0.7 *An area 16 km on either side of the Susltna River from Gold Creek to the mouth of the Maclaren River. JI*Hectares of closed birch are apparently greater In the Impact areas than for the entire basin.because the basin was mapped at a much smaller scale,and many of the closed birch stands did not appear at that scale. ***Balsam poplar stands were to small to be mapped at the scale of which the upper Susltna River basin was mapped. TABLE W29 PROXIMITY TO ~~E SUSITNA RIVER OF RELOCATIONS OF 9 MALE (M)AND 29 FEMALE (F) MOOSE RAD IO-COLLARED ALONG THE SUS ITNA RIVER BETWEEN DEV IL CANYON At{)THE DELTA ISLANDS,ALASKA,1980-81 (from Modafferi (1982) Number-~_._---_._--Dlstance--oTRelocatlons from River (ml) Locatlon 1 Sex Individuals Relocations River 0-1 1-3 3-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20+ Upstream 22M 74 3 36 29 6 F 10 222 21 82 90 22 6 0 Downstream 63WestsideM 162 13 10 55 21 43 0 19 F 15 403 101 41 67 14 87 74 19 Eastside M 1 4 45 0 0 2 1 0 9 11 22 F 45 166 5 4 17 32 77 22 9 Upstream -moose captured north of Talkeetna. Downstream -moose captured south of Talkeetna. Westside -captured moose that spent the breeding season to the west of the Susltna River. Easts Ide -captured moose that spent the breeding season to the east of the Susltna River. 2 One Individual studied 1-1/2 years. 3 One individual studied 1-1/2 years. 4 Individual studied for 1-1/2 years. 5 Three Individuals studied for 1-1/2 years. I J I J cl :I ]I I J J J J i ,I ]J TABLE W30 SUMMARY OF MOOSE CENSUS DATA AND SUBSEQUENT FOPULATlON ESTIMATES FOR COUNT AREAS 7 AND 14 DERIVED FROM SURVEYS CONDUCTED ALONG lrlE SUS I TNA RIVER FRa-1 t\OVEMBER 5 THROUGH NOVEMBER 8,1980 (Table modIfied from Ballard eT al.[1982J) >- Moose DensiTy STraTum Low Medium High Number of samp Ie areas 11 9 6 censused ToTal number of samples 26 27 18 areas In each sTraTum Area of each sTraTum (km 2 )864 920 663 Moose densiTy per sTraTum >1.125 1.847 3.726 R:>pul aTlon eSTImaTe per 375 656 954 sTraTum Total population estImaTe 90%CI=1986 +371 SlghTabl I lTy correcTion factor =1.03 CorrecTed popul aTlon eSTimaTe =2046 +382 r- a TABLE W31 DENSITY (MOOSE/KM OF RIVER)OF MOOSE OBSERVED ON 3 AERIAL CENSUSES IN 4 ZONES OF RIPARIAN HABITAT ALONG THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM COOK INLET TO DEVIL CANYON,ALASKA,1981-82 (From i"'Cdafferl [1982 a,bJ) AerIal census number b River Zone a 2 3 4 5 6 0.45 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.31 0.09 II 0.53 0.63 0.17 0.57 0.83 0.60 III 2.26 2.94 2.06 3.66 2.55 0.88 IV 3.08 2.40 2.30 2.68 1.03 NA All zones 1.50 1.41 1.11 1.72 1.20 0.47 I =Devil Canyon to Talkeetna;80 km. I I =Ta I keetna to Montana Creek,30 km. II I =Montana Creek to Yentna River,65 km. IV =Yentna RIver to Cook Inlet,40 km. b 1 =December 9 -10,1981. 2 =December 28,1981 and January 4,1982. 3 =February 2 and 6,1982. 4 =March 1 ..;2,1982. 5 =March 23 -24,1982. 5 =Apr II 12,1982. - ~I - TABLE W32 SUMMARY <F MOOSE SEX AND AGE CQMFDSIT10N DATA COLLECTED ANNUALLY IN CA 6 IN GAJ'-E MANAGEJ'-ENT UNIT 13 OF SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA <Table modIfIed from Ballard et al.[1982]) TABLE W33 SUMMARY a=MOOSE SEX AND AGe COMFOS ITION DATA COLLECTED ANNUALLY INCA 7 1N GAME MANAGE1'ENT UN IT 13 OF SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA (Table modified from Ballard et ale [1982]) Incidence of Twins Total Small Ca Ives Per 100 "... Mal es Per Moose %per 100 Females Cal f %Total Date 100 Females In Herd Females With Cal f In Herd Sample 1957 N 0 D A T A lIIIIL'iW\ 1958 N 0 D A fA 1959 N 0 D A T A 1960 N 0 D A T A 1961 N 0 D A T A 1962 N 0 D A T A 1963 a 47.7 3.3 38.5 0.0 20.7 121 1964 b 39.7 6.3 31.4 2.8 18.4 207 1965 a 59.8 7.8 16.2 0.0 9.2 412 1966 48.3 3.8 20.1 0.0 11.9 293 """" 1967 41 .0 4.4 20.6 2.5 12.8 642 1968 N 0 D A T A 1969 N 0 D A T A 1970 34.7 5.0 42.1 8.6 23.6 864 1971 26.3 5.3 33.2 7.1 20.8 624 1972 20.6 2.0 17.5 3.7 12.6 665 1973 21.9 6.0 16.3 2.9 11.8 890 1974 12.6 3.0 28.3 6.3 20.1 672 1975 10.0 3.4 15.9 4.8 12.7 695 -, 1976 12.3 3.2 21.6 7.1 16.1 865 1977 10.8 3.0 28.7 6.0 20.6 954 1978 14.8 5.9 20.2 4.1 15.0 1030 1979 8.8 1.8 23.3 5.8 17.7 838 1980 13.3 5.6 25.1 1.1 17.9 946 1981 14.2 3.4 31.6 0.0 21.7 1284 ""'1 Remarks:~!'rea boundary change -check maps 1969,!'rea No.7. Early 1965 data used for 1964. ~! - TABLE W33 SUMMARY a=MOOSE SEX AND Af£COMFOS ITION DATA COLLECTED ANNUALLY IN CA 7 IN GAME MANAGEMENT UNIT 13 OF SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA (Table modified from Bal lard et al.[1982]) Incidence """of Twins Total Small Calves Per 100 Mal es Per ~ose %per 100 Femal es Cal f %Total Date 100 Females In Herd Females WIth Calf In Herd Sample ~,1957 N 0 D A T A 1958 N 0 OAT A 1959 N 0 D A T A 1960 N 0 D A T A 1961 N 0 D A T A 1962 N 0 OAT A 1963 a 47.7 3.3 38.5 0.0 20.7 121 1964 b 39.7 6.3 31.4 2.8 18.4 207 1965 a 59.8 7.8 16.2 0.0 9.2 412 1966 48.3 3.8 20.1 0.0 11.9 293 1967 41.0 4.4 20.6 2.5 12.8 642 1968 N 0 OAT A 1969 N 0 OAT A....1970 34.7 5.0 42.1 8.6 23.6 864 1971 26.3 5.3 33.2 7.1 20.8 624 1972 20.6 2.0 17.5 3.7 12.6 665 1973 21.9 6.0 16 •.3 2.9 11.8 890 1974 12.6 3.0 28.3 6.3 20.1 672 1975 10.0 3.4 15.9 4.8 12.7 695 1976 12.3 3.2 21.6 7.1 16.1 865 1977 10.8 3.0 28.7 6.0 20.6 954 1978 14.8 5.9 20.2 4.1 15.0 1030 1979 8.8 1.8 23.3 5.8 17.7 838 1980 13.3 5.6 25.1 1.1 17.9 946 1981 14.2 3.4 31.6 0.0 21.7 1284 Remarks:~Area boundary change -check maps 1969,Area No.7. Early 1965 data used for 1964. - TABLE W34 SUMMARY CF MOOSE SEX AND AGE CCMRJS ITION DATA COLLECTED ANNUALLY INCA 14 IN GAr-E f'AANAGEr-ENT UN IT 13 OF SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA (Table modIfied from Bal lard et al.[1982)) Incidence of TwIns Total Sma!I Calves Per 100 '"""Males Per f\bose %per 100 Females Calf %Total Date 100 Females In Herd Females With Calf In Herd Sample 1955 a 105.6 10.5 73.2 10.6 26.0 200 ~ 1956 N 0 D A T A 1957 72.5 5.2 50.3 4.9 22.6 381 1958 a 86.8 5.0 37.0 7.4 16.6 441 1959 N 0 D A T A 1960 a 71 .1 8.6 56.7 21.4 24.5 139 1961 a 62.0 12.2 55.7 7.6 25.6 555 1962 56.3 10.1 23.8 1.8 13.2 416 1963 N 0 D A T A 1964 N 0 D A T A 1965 28.6 7.2 21.6 0.0 14.4 278 1966 a 20.0 5.9 33.5 0.0 21.8 238 1967 39.0 3.9 34.1 2.9 19.7 355 1968 a 9.4 2.8 36.5 3.8 25.0 108 ~1969 17.5 4.0 40.1 2.0 25.4 405 1970 19.4 2.2 44.4 2.1 25.9 185 1971 27.1 5.7 20.7 5.0 14.0 300 1972 21.4 6.2 25.5 0.0 17.4 288 1973 22.0 5.1 17.3 2.0 12.4 411 1974 15.4 3.4 35.2 3.7 23.4 500 1975 9.9 3.3 21.7 1.9 16.5 333 1976 9.2 3.6 19.9 3.0 15.4 447 1977 N 0 D A T A -1978 20.5 6.6 18.3 2.0 13.2 379 1979 N 0 D A T A 1980 13.7 7.4 16.2 3.8 12.5 447 1981 N 0 D A T A -, Remarks:a Area boundary change -check maps. TABLE W35 SLMMARY r:F MOOSE SEX AND AGE COMFOSITION DATA OOTAINED DURING SURVEYS OF RIPARIAN COMMUNITIES ALONG THE LOWER SUSITNA RIVER (Based on f'.bdafferl [198213) IncIdence Iwins Total Males Calves Fer 100 Calf Fer 100 Fer 100 Females %In Total River Zone a Females Females WIth Cal f Herd Sample 40.0 40.0 0.0 22.2 36 11 37.5 62.5 25.0 31 .3 16 111 10.9 45.7 13.5 30.6 147 IV 33.3 53.0 12.9 28.5 123-TOTAL 23.1 48.4 12.5 28.9 322 a r =DevIl canyon to Talkeetna.,.,.. II =Tal keetna to t-bntana Creek. III =Montana Creek to Yentna River. IV =Yentna RI vet:"to Cook Inlet. "... TABLE W36 ffiOF\JRT ION <F RAO IO-COLLARED CAR IBOU SIGJTtNGS IN EACH VEGETATION TYPE (Data from PItcher 1962a) calving,Summer Aufumn Rut,wi nfer,Spr lng fofal Hab ltat Cows Bu II s Cows Bull s .Cows Bu lis Cows Bull s -Spruce forest 0.0 24.6 36.4 25.0 56.5 77.7 34.2 50.9 Tundra-herbaceous 12.5 37.9 29.1 20.8 11.6 9.3 36.0 19.4 Shrub I and 26.7 37.9 16.4 41.7 24.3 9.3 23.9 24.1 "'!1fi Bare substrate 0.8 3.3 18.2 12.5 5.5 3.7 5.9 5.6 Total slghtlngs 120 30 55 24 164 54 339 108 TABLE W37 NELCHINA CARIBOU HERD FOPULATION ESTIMATES (Fall estimates for years after 1962) ~ Total Female Male Calt Year Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 1955 40,OOOa 1962 71,OOOb 1967 61,OOOc 1972 7,842 4,800 1,622 1,420 1973 7,693 4,646 1,268 1,779 1976 8,081 4,979 1,663 1,439 1977 13,936 7,509 2,868 3,559 1978 18,981 9,866 4,429 4,686 1980 18,713d 9,164 5,673 3,876 1981 20,730 10,172 6,195 4,364 a Watson and Scott (1956),February census. b Slnlff and Skoog (1964),February census perhaps should be adjusted downward by as many as 5,000 caribou due to presence of Mentasta herd. c Felt by some to be an unreasonably hIgh estimate. d Prel Imfnary estimate,awaiting final female harvest data. ,."", .~ TABLE W38 REPORTED HUNTER HARVEST OF THE NELCHINA CARIBOU HERD,1972-1981 Females Males Year Total Harvest No.(%)No.(%) 1972 555 153 (28)338 (72)~, 1973 529 203 (33)411 (57) 1974 1,036 343 (34)555 (55) 1975 559 201 (31)441 (59) 1975 775 201 (25)560 (74) 1977 360 77 (22)275 (78) 1978 539 111 (21)416 (79) 1979 630 90 (14 )509 (a1) 1980 621 117 (21)453 (79) 1981 a 856 144 (18)575 (82)~, a Prel imi nay data. '""" ~, TABLE W39 COMPILATION OF HIGHEST YEARLY COUNTS COMPLETED IN WATANA HILLS SHEEP TREND COUNT AREA Legal %Legal % Year Rams*Lambs ToTa I Rams Lambs Surveyor 1950 0 Scott 1967 230 Ni chol s 1968 183 26.6 Nichols.AugusT 1973 10 40 176 5.6 22.7 Mc I troy.AugusT 1974 6 18 76 7.9 23.7 Harkness.Apri I 1976 4 30 130 3.1 23.0 Eide.AUgusT 1977 4 33 152 2.6 21.7 Spraker.July 11 1978 5 34 189 2.6 18.0 Eide.July 23 1980 9 42 174 5.1 24.1 Tobey.July 22 1981 2 43 209 >1.0 20.6 WesTlund.July 28 ~~*A legal ram is def i ned as rav ing a 3/4 curl or greaTer rorn. Beginning in 1979 a legal ram is def I ned as havi ng a 7/8 curl orgreai"er horn. - TABLE W40 NUMBER AND AGE-SEX CLASSIFICATION OF SHEEP OBSERVED AT JAY CREEK MINERAL LICKS FROM MAY 6 THROUGH JUNE 24,1981 """ - Date Time Location Sheep Ewes Yearl ings Lambs Rams 5/06 West sidea 5 5/08 West side 15 2 2 5/09 a.m.West side 4 5/13 1645 West side 2 5/14 0900 West side 4 5/18 1355 West side 4 6 ~ 5/21 West side 8 5/22 1700 West side 8 1 1 5 5/23 1145 East side 9 2 1 6 5/24 1840 West side b 9 1 2 6-7 5/25 1152 East side 14 1 1 12 5/26 1808 a 5/27 2225 0 5/30 East side 5 6/02 0 6/03 1405 Upstream E.c 1 1 6/03 1408 Upstream W.9 9 ·6/04 1926 0 0 6/05 1900 East side 9 9 ~ 6/06 2146 West side 9 6/07 2025 East side 9 6/08 2115 East side 10 6/09 West side 7 7 -6/10 0955 West side 4 2 2 6/11 West side 4 3 6/12 1939 Upstream 10 6/13 1154 East side 1 1 6/13 1154 Upstream W.7 4 3 ~; 6/14 0933 0 6/15 1509 West side 4 4 6/15 1509 Upstream 3 2 6/16 1102 Upstream W.4 3 """"6/17 1155 Upstream E.1 1 6/19 1000 Upstream 1 4 6/19 1000 West side 1 1 6/21 1545 West side 14 6/24 0847 West side 7 7 a Bluff on western bank of lower Jay Creek..... b Directly across Jay Creek from above site. C Two mi I es upstream f rom above site. It"" - TABLE W41 NUMBER OF AERIAL BROWN BEAR OBSERVATIONS BY MONTH IN EACH OF 5 MAJOR HABITAT CATEGORIES (From Mi Iler and MeAl I ister [1982]) Octoberl All Habitat May June July August September Apri I Months Spruce 44 50 17 16 9 5 141 %of Months 31.2 35.5 12.1 11.3 6.4 3.5 (25.0) %of Hab itats 31 .0 29.6 19.3 17 .6 25.0 13.2 ~. Riparian 16 26 22 20 4 1 89 %of Months 18.0 29.2 24.7 22.5 4.5 1 .1 (15.8) %of Habitats 11.3 15.4 25.0 22.0 11 .1 2.6.- Shrubland 39 75 46 52 21 5 238 %of Months 16.4 31.5 19.3 21.8 8.8 2.1 (42.2) ~%of Habitats 27.5 44.4 52.3 57.1 58.3 13.2 Tundra 12 14 1 1 a a 28 %of Months 42.9 50.0 3.6 3.6 a 0 (5.0)-%of Habitats 8.5 8.3 1 .1 1 .1 a a Other 31 4 2 2 2 27 68-,%of Months 45.6 5.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 39.7 (12.1) %of Habitats 21.8 2.4 2.3 2.2 5.6 71.1 All Habitats 142 169 88 91 36 38 564 (25.2)<30.0 ) (15.6)(16.1)(6.4)(6.7)(100.0) - - TABLE W42 COMPARISON OF REPORTED HOME RANGE SIZES OF BROWN/GRIZZLY BEARS IN NORTH AMERICA (Adapted from Reynolds,1980) - "}J J J }1 .1/]1 j TABLE W43:DENSITIES OF SELECTED NORTH AMERItAN BROWN BEAR POPULATIONS (From Miller and McAllister [1982]). mi 2/Bear km 2/Bear 0.6 1.6 6.0a 15.5 B.2 21.2 11.0 28.5 9-11 23-27 16-24 41-62 88 (16-300)C 2BB (42-780)C 100 260 Locat ion Kodiak Island,AK Alaska Peninsula,AK Glacier Nat ional Park,Mont ana Glacier National Park,BC SW Yukon Territory Upper Susitna River,AK Western Brooks Range (NPR-A),AK Eastern Brooks Range,AK Source Troyer and Hensel,1964 Unpublished data (Glenn pers.comm.) Martinka,1974b Mundy and Flook,19nb Pearson,1975 Miller and Ballard,1980 Reynolds,19BO Reynolds,1976 a Data refer to an 1,800 miZ intensively studi~d area of the central Alaska Peninsula. b Taken from Pearson,1975. C Mean is for the entire National Petroleum Reserve,Alaska;the range represents values for different habitat types in this reserve.The highest density occurred in an intensively studied experimental area. TABLE W44 AVERAGE AGE AND SEX RATIOS OF BROWN BEAR PCPULATIONS IN lHE UPPER SUSITNA AND NELCHINA RIVER BASINS (From Mi Iler and MeAl I istar 1982) M a I e s F e m a I e s Average Average Average Sex Spring Age Spri ng Age Both Sexes Ratio % Subpopulatlons (Years)(Range)n (Years)(Range)n (Years)Males GMU 13 fall harvests, 1970-1980 8.0 0.5-23.5)208 7.7 <3.5-28.5)191 7.9 52 1979 Upper Susltna studies (Miller & Ballard 1980)7.4 0.5-21.5)17 7.4 0.5-16.5)15 7.4 53 Upper Susitna Basin (1980-1981):all captures 7.7 <3.5-14.5)14 7.9 <3.5-13.5)15 7.8 48 Radio-collared bears (1980-1981) with >5 captures 6.0 <3.5-10.5)4 8.6 0.5-13.5)13 8.0 24 a a Because adult male bears lost thei r 001 lars more easily than adult females,this ratio underestimated the percentage of males. ~J j I \J ..~J j •, ~))I TABLE W45 't j 1 I j 1 LITTER SIZES OF VARIOUS NORTH AMERICAN BROWN BEAR POPULATIONS (From Miller and McAllister 11982 ) Source Area Average Litter Size (No.of Litters Observed) Age of Littero.-s 1.5 0.5-1 ':5 Pearson 1975 Southwestern Yukon Territory Martinka 1974 Glacier National Park,Montana This StUdy Nelchlna Basin,Alaska Reynolds 1976 Eastern Brooks Range,Alaska Reynolds 1980*Western Brooks Range,Alaska Mundy 1963 Glacier National Park,B.C. Klein 1958 Southeastern Alaska Glenn et al.1976 McNeil River,Alaska Glenn 1976 &updated Black Lake,Alaska Peninsula Hensel et al.1969 Kodiak Island,Alaska Craighead et al.1976 Yellowstone National Park *Calculations from data presented In Table 3 of Reynolds 1.7(11)1.5(11)1.6(22) 1.7(35)1.8(30) 1.7(65) 2.3(9)1.6(16)1.7(10) 1.8(13)2.0(7)1.9(20) 2.0(33)1.9(21)2.0(54) 1.9(81)1.8(45)1.9(126) 2.2(25)1.9(35)2.0(60) 2.5(41)1.8(69)2.1(110) 2.1(19)2.1(51)2.1(70) 2.2(98)2.0(103)2.1 (201 ) 2.2(68) (1980 ) TABLE W46 REPRODUCTIVE RATES OF NORTH AMERICAN BROWN BEAR POPULATIONS {From Miller and MeAl I (ster 119821) Mean Age at 1st Potential Production to Reproduct Ion Potential x Reproduct.lve Rate Maximum Age Life ~Reproductive Litter Production (No.cubs/adu It Area of Breed I ng Interval Size of Cubs female/year) Yellowstone Park 6.3 -24.8 18.5 years x 2.24 =12.2 0.66 (Craighead et al.1976)3.40 Alaska Peninsula 6.3 -24.8 18.5 ,ears x 2.50 =12.3 0.66 (Glenn et al.1976)**3.1 Eastern Brooks Range 0.1 -24.8 14.7 years x 1.78 =6.2 0.42 (Reynolds 1976)**4.24 Western Brooks Range 8.4 -24.8 16.4 years x 2.03 =8.3 0.50 (Reynolds 1980)4.03 Nelchlna Basin 5.2 -24.8 19.6 3ears,x 2.3 =13.7 0.70 (This study)3. Nelchina Basin 5.2 -14.4***~ears x 2.3 '"6.4 0.70 (This study)3.3 *This potential may be close to actual in lightly hunted populations In Yellowstone and the Brooks Range,It probably over estimates productivity of teavlly runted population (Alaska Peninsula). **Reynold's (1980)analysis of data presented by others. ***Max i mum age based on age of 30 fema I as (2,.12 yea rs)I n t he sport ta rvast 1970-1980. l:f ),I )i J J :}l )coer I JJ 1',))!_1 ~ I '~, ,l'1 i ~,}1 TABLE W49 t ] SUMMARY OF REPORTED BLACK BEAR HARVESTS FROM ALASKA'S GAME MANAGEMENT UNIT 13,1973-1980 (From Miller and MeAll ister (19821) Total %Total Harvest Sport Average Age (n)a %Males Taken In Fall Ad Bd CdYearTakeMalesFemalesBothspringFallBothMalesFemalesBoth 1973 70 5.9(39)5.2(20)5.6 NA 63 63 100 100 100 49 14 1974 48 5.7(26)7 .8(14)6.4 86 64 67 81 93 85 21 25 1975 67 75 75 75 67 67 67 19 36 1976 63 5.2(5)63 70 67 63 55 62 21 26 55 1977 b 58 5.1(26)4 .8(12)5.0 81 64 69 66 82 71 19 26 52 1978 c 70 5.4(13)80 63 68 64 81 69 20 7 64 1979 c 70 68 50 55 64 79 70 11 18 73 1980 85 77 74 75 67 71 69 24 32 67 7~80 531 5.6(121)5.9(58)5.7 74 65 68 71 79 74 23 184 63 Fall Only -5.5(88) 5.9(49)5.6 Spring Only -5.7(33)6.3(9)5.8 a Mean age given only when n >5. b Only fall bears aged. c On Iy spr I n9 bears aged. d A %of total take by non-residents. B Number taken by hunters reportl ng aI rcraft as primary source of transport at Ion. e %of tota I where meat was sal vaged for food. TABLE W50 COMPARISONS OF FOOD REMAINS IN WOLF SCATS COLLECT AT DEN AND RENDEZVOUS SITES IN 1980 AND 1981 FROM THE EASTERN SUSITNA BASIN AND ADJACENT AREAS (From Ballard et al.1982) - - Food Items 1980 1981 727 Scats 290 Scats No.Items %Occurrences No.Items %Occurrences Adult Moose 105 12.00 24 6.15 ~. Calf Moose 369 42.17 87 22.31 Moose.Pge Unknown 22 2.51 21 5.38 Adult Caribou 30 3.43 31 7.95 Calf Caribou 13 1.49 19 4.87 Caribou.Age Unknown 8 0.91 5 1.28 Moose or Caribou 31 3.54 9 2.31 Beaver 48 5.49 37 9.49 Muskrat 26 2.97 24 6.15 Snowshoe Hare 55 6.29 21 5.38 ~ Microtine 40 4.57 37 9.49 Unidentified Small 15 1.71 20 5.13 """Mammal Bird 16 1.83 8 2.05 Fish 0.11 2 0.51 Vegetation 22 2.51 5 1.28 Wolf 4 0.46 0.26 Unknown 70 8.00 39 10.00 -Total 875 100.00 390 100.00 TABLE W51 ESTIMATE OF NUMBERS OF WOLVES BY.INDIVIDUAL PACK INHABITING THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC STUDY AREA IN SPRING AND FALL 1980 AND 1981 (From Ballard aT al.1982) *Lower Section contained no clearwater habitat in sample units surveyed. - ...... .~. TABLE W53 Aerial counts of beaver structures along 15.2 km of lower Deadman CreeK Immediately downstream from Deadman Lake,and a marshy section of upper Deadman Creek from its mouth at Deadman Lake 3.2 km upstream from the lake. Lodoes Dams Location Catches Active Inactive Active Inactive Lower Deadman Creek 8 9 1 5 3 4 Upper Deadman Creek 5 5 0 0 0 TOTAL 13 14 5 3 4 l Two apparently active lodges were observed 'II ithi n 30 meters of each other and on Iy one food cache was noted between t he lodges.Poss i b IY both of these lodges had been active during summer,but only one would remain active through wi nter • ·~. TABLE W54 RESULTS OF SURVEYS FOR MUSKRAT PUSHUPS UPSTREAM FROM GOLD CREEK DURING SPRING 1980 (From Gipson et al 1982) ~. Location of Lakes Lake Elevation No Quarter Number MSL .(m)Pushups Section Section Range Towns hi p 001 267 2 SW 31 \1'1 32N SE 31 11'1 32N 002 472 4 SE 30 11'1 32N SW 29 11'1 32N 003 526 14 NE 30 11'1 32N NW 29 11'1 32N 004 640 0 NE 20 11'1 32N NW 21 11'1 32N SE 20 11'1 32N 005 500 26 SE 15 11'1 32N SW 14 lW 32N SE 14 11'1 32N NW 23 11'1 32N 006 495 0 NW 23 11'1 32N io!'1ii1 NE 23 lW 32N 007 480 0 NW 24 11'1 32N SW 24 11'1 32N SE 23 11'1 32N NE 23 11'1 32N 008 463 0 SW 6 lE 31N 009 463 0 SE 6 IE 31N 010 442 0 SW 32 IE 32N 011 472 O·SE 32 lE 32N 012 419 0 SE 32 lE 32N 013 542 0 SW 4 IE 32N SE 4 lE 32N 014 724 0 NW 28 IE 32N 015 724 0 NE 21 IE 32N NW 22 IE 32N SW 22 IE 32N NW 27 IE 32N SE 21 IE 32N 016 712 a SW 16 IE 32N SE 16 IE 32N SW 15 IE 32N NW 22 IE 32N ~ NE 21 lE 32N 017 754 0 NE 22 IE 32N NW 23 1E 32N 018 572 0 NW 35 \E 32N 019 503 0 SW 35 IE 32N NW 2 1E 31N .020 541 0 SE 35 lE 32N NE 2 lE 31N 021 724 0 NW 36 lE 32N 022 724 0 NW 36 1E 32N 023 686 0 51'1 24 lE 32N SE 24 IE 32N SW 19 2E 32N .....NW 30 2E 32N NE 25 IE 32N NW 25 IE 32N0247240NE192E32N NW 20 2E 32N -025 722 0 NW 20 2E 32N NE 20 2E 32N SE 20 2E 32N SW 20 2E 32N - TABLE W54 ,;..~RESULTS OF SURVEYS FOR.MUSKRAT PUSHUPS UPSTREAM FROM GOLD CREEK DURING SPRING 1980 (From Gipson et al 1982)(Cont'd) ~~ Location of Lakes Lake Elevation No Quarter Number MSL (m)Pus hups SectIon Section Range Townshi p 026 709 0 SW 21 2E 32N 027 533 0 NW 27 2E 32N NE 27 2E 32N SE 27 2£32N SW 27 2E 32N 028 754 0 NE 7 4£31N 029 716 0 SW 8 4E 31N 030 602 0 NW 17 4E 31N 031 602 0 NE 17 4E 31N 032 693 1 NW 5 5E 31N SW 5 5E 31N 033 693 0 SW 5 5E 31N 034 716 0 SW 4 5E 31N SE 5 5E 31N 035 680 0 SW 9 5E 31N SE 9 5E 31N NE 16 5£31N ,~NW 16 5E 31N NE 17 5E 31N NW 17 5E 31N NE 18 5E 31N SE 7 5E 31N SW 8 5E 31N SE 8 5E 31N 036 678 8 SW 10 5E 31N SE 9 5£31N 037 693 0 SE 3 5E 31N SW 3 5E 31N SE 10 5E 31N SW 10 5E 31N NE 9 5E 31N 038 .643 0 SE 11 5E 31N SW 11 5E 31N NW 14 5E 31N NE 15 5£31N SW 15 5E 31N NW 15 5E 31N SW 10 5£31N 039 709 0 NW 3 5E 31N-040 683 0 SW 21 5£32N 041 678 1 NW 21 5E 32N 042 683 0 N£21 5£32N 043 689 1 NE 21 5£32N NW 22 5£32N-SE 21 5£32N\NE 21 5£32N 044 693 0 SW 15 5£32N NW 22 5£32N 045 683 0 SE 16 5£32N NE 21 5£32N 046 693 0 SE 15 5£32N SW 45 5E 32N-047 683 7 NW 15 5£32N NE 16 5E 32N 048 739 6 NW 10 5E 32N 049 716 0 NW 14 5E 32N SW 14 5E 32N ,~050 716 0 NW 14 5E 32N 051 716 0 NW 14 5E 32N TABLE W54 ~RESULTS OF SURVEYS FOR MUSKRAT PUSHUPS UPSTREAM FROM GOLD CREEK DURING SPRING 1980 (From Gipson et al 1982)(Cont'd) ~ Location of Lakes Lake Elevation No Quarter Number MSL (m)Pus hups Section Section Range Township 081 823 a SE 6 8E 31N SW 5 8E 31N 082 564 2 SW 8 8E 31N 083 770 a SW 33 8E 32N""'"NE 33 8E 32N 084 770 0 NW 3 8E 31N 085 808 a SW 2 8E 31N SE 2 8E 31N 086 808 0 SE 2 8E 31N 087 808 a SE 2 8E 31N 088 741 1 SE 7 9E 31N 089 866 25 SE 25 11 E 30N SW 30 lIE 30N NW 31 11 E 30N NE 36 11 E 30N 090 870 2 SE 30 lIE 30N NW 31 11 E 30N 091 869 a NW 31 11 E 30N 092 777 1 SW 5 lIE 29N NW 8 l1E 29N 093 777 a NW 8 l1E 29N-NE 8 l1E 29N SE 8 11 E 29N SW 8 lIE 29N 094 780 a SE 5 11 E 29N NE 8 l1E 29N 095 777 a SW 4 11 E 29N 096 777 a NW 9 11 E .29N 097 777 0 NW 9 11 E 29N 098 777 a NW 9 11 E 29N SW 9 11 E 29N 099 777 0 SE 8 11 E 29N SW 9 11 E 29N 100 853 1 NE 26 10E 30N ".....101 853 0 NE 26 10E 30N NW 25 10E 30N 102 853 0 SW 24 10E 30N 103 853 0 SW 23 3E 30N NW 26 3E 30N TABLE W55 ~ NUMBERS OF FURBEARER TRACKS SEEN DURING AERIAL TRANSECTS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN.AUTUMN 1980 """', (From Gipson et al.1982) ~ Transeaa SFOrt-ta i led Number Marten Fox Weasel Mink Otter Totals 01 41 3 5 2 52 02 80 0 7 6 94 03 91 9 5 3 0 106 - 04 198 0 20 0 3 221 05 B4 0 11 0 96 06 163 0 6 0 170 07 202 23 39 0 2 266 1Il"!'1i 08 86 11 0 2 5 104 09 85 11 2 0 99 10 125 20 95 2 3 245 11 39 30 58 2 130 12 40 38 96 5 180 JJi!!I1!, 13 7 60 77 5 3 152 14 112 10 328 6 3 459 """"'I Totals 1353 213 746 34 30 2376 -a See Figure S for transeCT locaTions. """ r- I TABLE W56 NUMBER OF TRAO<S OF OTTER AND MINK OOSERVED AT NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF 37 SUSITNA RIVER CHEO<PO I NTS I NOVEMBER 10-12,1980a (From Gipson et alo 1982) TABLE W57 i'!'l'\ RESULTS OF MARTEN SCAT ANALYSES BY SEASON,BASED UPON PERCENT FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE (from Gipson et al.[1982l ) -Autumn Wi ntar Spring Autumn Unknown 1980 1980-81 1981 1981 Season Total Unknown Mammal 0.0 0.7 3.9 0.7 0.0 1.2 Mi croti ne 83.3 85.6 82.7 98.7 85.7 88.8 Shrew 16.7 2.7 2.9 0.0 1.3 2.4 Sci ur id 4.2 9.6 15.4 0.0 3.9 6.8 Ungulate 16.7 0.0 1.9 1.4 6.5 2.6 Snows hoe Hare 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.9 1 .0 ~ Muskrat 0.0 3.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 1.6 Bird 4.2 17.1 12.5 3.4 5.2 9.6 Berry 41.7 39.7 29.8 1.4 19.5 23.3 Fish 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.0 1.3 0.6 Human Foods 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 1.2 Total Scats 24.0 146.0 104.0 148.0 77.0 499.0 Food Items/Scat 1 .7 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.4 1.5 - TABLE W58 TRACKS OF RED FOXES ENCOUNJERED DURING FALL 1980 AERIAL TRANSECT SURVEYS (From Gipson et al.1982) Number of Fox Tracks p&.""EI evat ion (m)North side Suslfna Soufh side Susifna 516 -547 548 -581 2 4 582 -613 5 -.614 -645 646 -677 678 -709 710 -741 20 2 742 -774 9 6,... 775 -806 10 18 807 -83B 2 !'"'"'"839 -870 12 47 871 -902 5 903-935 3B 936 -967 5 968 -1000 7 2-, 1001 -1032 1033 -1064 2 1065 -1096 3 11 1097 -1129 15 Total 79 151 Transects 1 -11 67 51- - TABLE W59:LOCATION AND STATUS OF RAPTOR AND RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA Corresponding U of A Museum No.(Kesse]USGS Nest ing at el,1982,Status a Talkeetna Mountains Locat ion B.Cooper -15 ft x 30 ft Location Estimated8 Soecies No.pers.comm.,1982)1974b 1980c 1981 c 1982d Quad No.Township Range Section Elevat ion m Golden Eagle GE-1 V,C,ii -x x NC C-1 nON R11E 7 716-7.31 (2,350-2,400) GE-2 D,T,gg -x x NC D-2 T31N R9E 17 610-655 (2,000-2,150 ) GE-3 E,kk,11 -x x t{;D-2 T31N R8E 1 715 (2,400)f GE-4 qq --0 x D-2 T31N R8E 15,22 564 (1,850) G£-5 F -x 0 t{;D-2 T31N R8E 9,10 549 (1,800) GE-6 -0 --NC D-2 T31N R8E 8,9 (579«1,900) GE-7 R --x NC D-3 T31N R7E 14 945 f 0,100) GE-8 G -x 0 NC D-3 T32N R6E 28 518 (1,600-1,700) GE-9 ff --0 NC.D-3 T32N R6E 29 518 (1,600-1,700) GE-10 ---0 NC D-4 T33N R5W 28 1,189 0,900) GE-11 dd --0 t{;D-4 T32N R4E 25 490-518 (1 ,6g0-1,700) GE-12 -0 --M:D-4 T31N R3E 15,14 (5491«1 ,800?) GE-13 z -0 0 NC D-4 T31N R3E 17,18 427-442 (1 ,400-1,450) I !)I I ,J I t ~I J 1 )),I I 1 )l J 1 1 -1 --I 1 1 TABLE W59:LOCATION AND STATUS or RAPTOR AND RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSUNA BASIN,ALASKA (Cont'd) Corresponding Uof A Museum No.(Kessel USGS Nest ing at el,1982,Status a Talkeetna Mountains Locat ion B.Cooper 1974b 1982d 15 Ft x 30 Ft Location Estimatede Soecies No.oers.comm ••1982 1980c 1981 c Quad No.Township Range Section Elevation m (ft) Golden Eagle GE-14 -0 - - NC D-4 T31N R3E 12 427-4517 (contd)(1,400-1,500?) GE-15 X,Y --0 NC D-5 T32N R2E 22,23 518-579 ( 1,700-1 ,900 GE-16 I -x x NC D-5 T32N R2E 27 470-485 (1,540-1,590) GE-17 pp --0 NC D~5 T31N R2E 17 610-625 (2,000-2,050) GE-18 M --x NC D-5 T32N R1E 32 335 (1 ,100) Bald Eagle 8E-1 -0 --NC C-1 T31N R12E 28,33 686-694 (2,250-2,275) 8E-2 B -x x NC C-1 T29N R11E 9,10 663-671 (2,175-2,210) BE-3 hh x -0 NC C-z nON R10E 16 579 (1,900) BE-4 S x -x NC D-2 T.31N R8E 11 540-549 ( 1,77 5-1 ,800) BE-5 A x x 0 NC D-3 T31N R7E 2 497-503 (1,630-1,650) BE-6 K -x x 1'£D-3 T33N R5E 34 760 (2,500) BE-7 N --x NC C-4 nON R3E 1 564-572 (1,850-1,875) BE-8 L 0 x x NC D-6 T31N R2W 9,10 230 (750) TABLE W59:LOCATION ANO STATUS OF RAPTOR ANO RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA (Cont'd) Correspond ing U of A Museum No.(Kessel USGS Nest ing at el,1982,St atus a Talkeetna Mountains Locat ion B.Cooper ~15 ft x 30 ft Location Estimatede Species No.pers.camm.,JJ82)19~1980c 1981 c 19BZd Quad No.Township Range Section Elevation ~~m (ffJ Gyrfalcon GYR-1 U x?-x NC C-Z nON R10E 11 686 (2,250) GYR-2 H x x 0 NC 0-5 T31N RZE 17,1B 587 (1,925) GYR-3 -x --NC 0-5 T31N H1E 5 579-610? (1,900-Z,000?) Goshawk GoS-l ---x x D-Z T31N RBE 10,15 518 (1 ,700) GOS-Z -?--NC 0-4 D1N H4E 10 442 (1,450) GOS-3 0 --x NC 0-5 T31N R1E 4 549 (1,800) Raven R-l -0 --t£C-l T.30N RllE 7,B Tl7? (2,350?) R-Z -x --NC C-2 nON Rl0E 11 671? (2,200?) R-3 jj x -0 NC C-2 T30N Rl0E 11 641 (2,100) R-4 -x --NC C-2 DON R10E 7,B 610-77B (Z,000-Z,550) R-5 -x --NC 0-2 T31N RBE 12 641 (Z,100) R-6 -0 --NC 0-2 D1N RBE 15 610 (Z,OOO) R-7 -x --NC 0-3 T31N RaE 7 534-549 ( 1,750-1 ,BOO) J J 1 I )~..~]I J J •)J I ] -1 1 1 }---1 --)I j "J TABLE W59:LOCATION AND STATUS OF RAPTOR AND RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA (Cont'd) Corresponding U of A Museum No.(Kessel USGS Nesting at el,1982,Status a Talkeetna Mountains Location B.Cooper --15 ft x30 ft Location Estimatede Soecies No.pers.comm.,1982)1974b 1980c 1981 c 198Zd Quad No.Township Range Section Elevat ion m Raven R-8 -x --NC D-.3 T32N R7E 33 519 (1,700) R-9 -x --NC D-3 T32N R6E 25 488 (1,600) R-10 -x 0 -NC 0-3 T32N R6E 28 488 (1,600) R-11 -0 --NC 0-3 T32N R5E Z6,35 564 (1,850) R-12 Q --x NC D-3 T3ZN R5E 23,26 625 (2,050) R-13 P,ee --x NC D-4 T3ZN R5E ZO 549 (1,800) R-14 mm,nn,cc --0 NC 0-4 f31N R4E 14 549-580 (1,800-1,900) R-15 0,aa,bb --x NC D-4 T31N R4E 15 519-580 (1,700-1,900) R-16 -0 --NC D-4 T31N R3E 18 442 (1,450) R-17 -0 --NC D-4 T31N R3E 13 442 (1,450) R-18 -0 --NC D-5 T3ZN RZE 36 421 (1,400) R-19 J x x -NC D-5 T3ZN R2E Z1 458 (1,500) R20 W --0 NC D-5 T32N RZE 33 366 (l,ZOO) TABLE W59:LOCATION AND STATUS OF RAPTOR AND RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA (Cont'd) Status a Soecies Raven (Contd) Nesting Locat ion No. R-21 Corresponding U of A Museum No.(Kessel at el,1982, B.Cooper ers.comm.,19B2)1974b o 19BO c 1981 c 1982 d NL USGS Talkeetna Mountains 1S ft x 30 ft Quad No. 0-5 T32N R1E 32 Est imatede Elevation m 427 (1,400) astatus unknown,x =possibly active,x =active,0 =inactive,-=pot reported (1974)or not located (1980 -1981)(although suitable habitat was present in most eases),NC =not checked. boata from White (1974). ~oata from Kessel,et aI,(1982),B.Kessel and B.Cooper (unpubl.data). Data from Kessel and Cooper (unpubl.data). eOifferences occur between elevations given here and those reported by Kessel,et al,(1982). Original estimates were.obtained by attempting to locate nests as accurately as possible on USGS!:63360 maps with contour intervals of 100'(majority)or 50'(Talkeetna Mtns C-1),but it was often difficult to precisely locate nests and to locate them relative to tightly spaced contolJr intervals (Cooper,pers.COIOIO.1982).All elevations have been reviewed and some revisions were made;however,in some cases estimates given here may contain errors of as much as +100'.All elevations must be considerd approximate (unless otherwise noted) f until the majority are rechecked with an altimeter (handhold or helicopter). Elevation checked with helicopter altimeter on October 11,1982. j -J J -.J J .J •J j -j I J 1 ,I -}1 }})1 )]1 1 1 \i TABLE W60 BREEDING CHRONOLOGIES OF EAGLES,GYRFALCON, AND COMMON RAVEN IN INTERIOR ALASKA Golden eagleb M 5 Mar~30 Apr 1 Apr-10 May 15 Apr-20 June 1 Ju ne-1 Sept 1 Aug-25 Sept Bal d eagleb M/R 10 Mar-1 May 20 Mar-10 May 30 Apr-30 June 20 May-15 Sept 1 Aug-3D Sept Gyrfal con b R 1 Mar-10 Apr 1 Apr-20 May.5 Apr-25 June 15 May-15 Aug 10 July-3D Sept Raven c R 1 Mar-15 Apr 1 Apr-5 May 5 Apr-25 May 25 Apr-25 June 25 May-15 July a M =migrant,R =resident b Data summarized from Roseneau et ai,(1981) C Based on calculations from Kessel (unpublished data)and Brown (1974) TABLE W61 DATA ON BALD EAGLE NESTS ALONG THE SUS ITNA RI VER,BETWEEN DEV IL CANYON AND COOK INLET.NESTS IN 1980 WERE OBSERVED IN APRIL BY U.S.FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICES;1981 NESTS WERE LOCATED ON 26 JUNE BY TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS.INC.;THE 1982 NESTS WERE RESULTS OF UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM SURVEYS.ALL 1982 NESTS WERE LOCATED IN LARGE,OLD COTTONWOOD TREES. Year and No. Status Chicks 80 8~L_~2 t2~2 Loca IIty Nest Tree Broken Height Height Topped (m) (m)1 Tree dead or alive Distance from river (m) Elevation (m/ft) '-----r-'r-,.,r-,r--r-1-'''--:-1- v_..•"I -.....~.-.....A __~.----f-..t ...................-+I _t .....".,....+I,.......nC'>,,+__~rv...tn-F-t'\,-"";:II+I",n North bank of Susltna River 1 km upstream from confluence with I nd I an River Island In Susltna River 4 km downstream from Sherman Confluence of Chulitna and Susltna rivers South bank of Talkeetna River 3 km upstream from confluance with Susltna River West bank of Susltna River opposite Talkeetna East bank of Susltna River 4.S km upstream from Parks Hlgt-...Jay Bridge East bank of Susltna River 2 km downstream from Parks Highway Bridge Island In Susltna River near Sreep Creek Slough Island In Susitna River west of Kashwitna Lake Island In Susltna River opposite mouth of Willow Creek Island In Susltna River 2 km west of mouth of Willow Creek NorttrNest oornerof Delta Islands West bank of Susltna River .S km upstream from mouth of Kroto Creek East bank of Susltna River opposite mouth of Kroto Creek East bank of Susltna River opposite Kroto Slough Island In Susltna River near Kroto Slough Island In Susltna River near Kroto Slough Island In Susltna River S km upstream from Yentna River mouth Island at oonfluence of Yentna and Susltna rivers East bank of Susltna River east of Flat Horn Lake West bank of Susitna River east of Flat Horn Lake South end of Bell Island Northern end of 8ig Island West bank of Susltna River west of Big Island West side of Big Island West side of Big Island East bank of Susltna River near Maid Lake Island In the Susltna River west of Beaver Lake Confluence of the Chunllna and Talkeetna rivers Island 1 km up to Talkeetna River Island In Susltna River 3 km downstream from Talkeetna West bank of Susltna River 6 km downstream from Talkeetna Island In Susitna River near mouth of Sheep Creek East bank of Susltna River near mouth of 196 'Mi Ie Creek North end of Delta Islands West bank of Susltna River west of Bell Island Island In Susltna River east of Bell Island Island In Susltna River 1 km upstream from Caswell Creak mouth 244 (800) 182 (600) 107 (350) 116 (380) 107 (350) 91 (300) 91 (300) 76 (250) 30 (100) 30 (100) 24 (80) 24 (80) 30 (100 27 (90) 30 (100) 24 (80) 24 (80) 20 (60) 17 (50) 10 (30) 10 (30) 7 (20) 3 (10) 3 (10) 3 (10) 3 (10) 3 (10) 3 (10) 137 (450) 107 (350) 107 (350) 107 (350) 60 (200) 45 (150) 30 (100) 7 (20) 7 (20) 55 (180) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N A A A I A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A I A I I A A A I A I I I I I I A A A o 2 2 1 >1 >1 -1 2 >1 o >1 -0 o >1 -0 oo o o oo 62°47'N 149°38'W: 62°40'N 149°55 IW: ,62°20 1N 150 010 1 W: 62°21 'N 150 003'W: 62°19 1N IS0008'W: 62°13 1 N 150 006 1 W: 62°10'N 150 010 1W: 62°01 IN 150 006'W: 61°49 1 N 150 010 1W: 61°47 1N 150 010'W: 61°46 1 N 150 013 1 W: 61°45 J N 150 015 1W: 61°43 i N IS0019 1 W: 61°43 1N 150 017 I W: 61°40 1 N IS0019 1 W: 61°39 1 N 150 020 1W: 61°39'N 150 021 1 W: 61°37'N IS0023 1W: 61°35'N 150 025 1 W: 61°28 1N 150 030 'W: 61°28 1 N 150 032 1W: 61°24 1 N 150 030 IW: 61°22'N 150 036 1W: 61°22 1N 150 037'W: 61°20 1 N 150 038 1 W: 61°20 1N IS0028'W: 61°25 1N 150 028 1 W: 61°22'N 150°31 'W: 61°22 1 N 150 001'W: 62°20 1N ISOoOS'W: 62°17 1 N 150 008 1W: 62°16'N 150 009 1W: 61°S9 1 N 150 007 1 W: 61°S4'N 150 007 1W: 61°46 1 N IS0013 1W: 61°Z8 1 N 150 032 1W: 61°27 1 N 150 030 1W: 61°57'N 150 006 1 W:,-J-)-r- 23 21 25 27 30 22 12 23 30 30 28 22 23 20 27 23 23 23 20 18 20 20 J- 23 21 33 30 33 33 23 30 34 30 28 30 27 27 30 30 27 25 34 23 23 20 r- Yes Yes No No No No No No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes r-: live dead dead live live live live· live dead live live live live live live live live live live live dead dead ,r- 4 250 200 3 10 5 30 10 90 40 100 20 5 100 5 100 5 3 1 2 20 20 .r-r-'r .- TABLE W62 SUMMARY OF TOTAL NUMBERS AND SPECIES COMPOSITION OF WATERBIRDS SEEN ON ~KES SURVEYED IN SPRING,SUMMER AND FALL IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Based on Kessel et al.1982) -Fall ' Spring ' Summer ' 1981 Species 1980 J'§8T 1981 Adults Broods Common loon 8 9 4 22 3 ~Arctic loon 5 2 a Red-t hroated 2 8 Loon spp.5 7 Red-necked grebe 17 16 4 7 1 HO'rned grebe 35 2 5 5 WhistlIng swan 42 8 Trumpeter swan 30 21 16 Swan spp.104 101 r-Canada goose 21 50 Mallard 438 467 296 10 1 Pintail 201 32 257 7 2 BI ue-w i nged tea I 1 Green-winged teal 125 16 152 2 1 Nort he rn s hqve I er 28 40 7 1 Amerl can wigeon 721 152 198 8 6 Canvasback 1 Redhead 28 Scaup,graater and lesser 1854 786 616 70 5 Ring-necked duck 14 Goldeneye,common and Barrow IS 471 247 89 6 Buff I emad 396 118 12 01 dsquaw 57 54 86 47 11,....Whlte-w i nged scoter 11 82 16 81 a Surf scoter 18 29 39 33 2 81 ack scoter 105 10 43 26 11 Scotter spp.134 162 86 6 1 ..-Common merganser 3 7 Red-breasted merganser 2 1 t"'erganser spp.161 133 25 1 New gUll 83 7 Bonapartls gull 5 a-'Arct i ctern 48 a Total bi rds 4925 2539 2046 461 60 Total wetl and area surveyed (km2)141.73 79.78 60.76 20.5 20.5 Density (bi rds/km2 of '"etl ands)34.1 31.8 81.0 22.5 2.9 1'- - - - '--I 1 -})J 1 TABLE W64 )1 }I I SEASONAL POPULATION STATISTICS FOR THE MORE IMPORTANT OF SURVEYED WATERBOD I ES OF THE UPPER SUS ITNA RIVER BAS IN., 1980-81.INCLUDED ARE WATERBODIES THAT WERE AMONG THE SIX HIGHEST IMPORTANCE VALUE RATINGS IN AT LEAST ONE SEASON. Fall 1980~--Fal r-t981~--Spring 1981tt ._~~Summer 1981 Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Density S'2e No.Denslt~No.No.Denslt~No.No.Denslt~No.No.of No.No. Waterbody (km )Birds (no/km )Species Birds (no/km )Species BI rds (no/km )Species Adults Adults Species Broods Murder Lake 0.15 39.0 260.0 4.3 38.0 253.3 3.0 51.3 342.2 5.0 23 153.3 5 Stephan Lake 3.55 156.0 43.9 9.5 168.5 47.5 5.0 99.7 28.1 7.3 87 24.5 9.2 WB 140 (Tyone R -0.90 53.5 59.4 5.0 30.5 33.9 2.5 48.3t 53.7t 3.7t 75 83.3 11 4 As Il3tna R group) WB 131 (MacLaren R -1.04 212.8 204.6 6.5 123.0 118.3 5.0 54.7t 52.6t 3.7t Tyone R grou p) WB 145 (Clarence Lake 1.60 103.8 64.8 7.0 42.5 26.6 4.5 58.7 36.7 7.0 35 21.9 8 6 area group) WB 059 (Fog Lake 1.44 72.8 50.5 6.5 55.0 38.2 3.0 21.3 14.8 4.7 54 37.5 11 5 group) Watana Lake 1.25 95.8 76.6 3.8 34 .5 27.6 2.0 21.3t 17.1t 3.0t 8 6.4 3 0 (Lower Deadman) Pistol Lake (Lower 0.76 19.0*17.9*4.0*4.0t 5.3 1.5t 85.0 111 .8 6.0 15 19.7 8 5 Deadman Creek group) WB 032 0.07 ----- ----8 114.3 4 6 (Fog Lake group) Sw Imm I n9 Bear Lake 0.57 ---11 .5 20.2 0.5 4.7t 8.2t D.7t 33 57.9 5 4 *Combines WB 064-067 **11,16,20 and 26 September 1980;15 and 26 September 1981 t 100 percent frozen on at least one survey tt3,10 and 26 May 1981 -Not surveyed TABLE W65 -MEAN NUMBER OF TERRITORIES OF EACH BIRD SPECIES ON 10-HA CENSUS PLOT,UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA,IN 1981 AND 1982 (+=SMALL PORTION OF A BREEDING TERRITORY ON CENSUS PLOT,COUNTED AS 0.1 IN DENSITY AND DIVERSITY CALCULATIONS;V =VISITOR TO PLOT) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982,and Kessel pers.comm.) HABITAT I White Spruce-White Spruce-apen Mat and Dwarf~Low Medium Low-Medium Tall Balsam Paper Paper Paper White Cushion Birch Birch Willow Alder Poplar Birch Birch (Mixed)BiTCh (Mixed)Spruce ~__jj>~~ies Tundra Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Forest Fores_t __f()r~::;t I Forest II Forest .Pintail Goshawk Marsh Hawk Spruce Grouse Ruffed Grouse Willow Ptarmigan Rock Ptarmigan Whlte-Ta il ed ptarm 19an American Golden Plover Whlmbrel White Spruce Woodland + Black Spruce Woodland Greater Yellowlegs Common S n I pe Long-Billed Dow Itcher Baird's Sandpiper Long-Tailed Jaeger Great Horned Owl Hawk Owl S hart-Eared Ow I 1.4 V V V V V V + V V 0.3 0.3 V 0.5 ,).I J I J J J I )j 1 )J J I J I J I 1 TABLE W65 )1 ')}»1 1 1 -MEAN NUMBER OF TERRITORIES OF EACH BIRD SPECIES ON 10-HA CENSUS PLOT,UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA,IN 1981 AND 1982 (+=SMALL PORTION OF A BREEDING TERRITORY ON CENSUS PLOT,COUNTED AS 0.1 IN DENSITY AND DIVERSITY CALCULATIONS;V =VISITOR TO PLOT)(Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982,and Kessel pers.comm.) HABITAT I WhlfeS-pruce---Whlte Spruce----Open Mat and Dwarf-Low Medium Low-Medium Tall Balsam Paper Paper Paper White White Black Cushion Birch Birch Willow Alder Poplar Birch Birch (Mixed)Birch (Mixed)Spruce Spruce Spruce Species Tundra Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Forest Forest Forest I Forest II Forest Woodland Woodland Common Flicker Hairy Woodpecker Downy Woodpecker Nortoorn Three-Toed Woodpecker Alder Flycatcher 01 ive-S Ided Flycatcoor Horned Lark Tree Swallow Violet-Green Swal low Gray Jay Black-Belled Magpie Common Raven Black-Capped Chickadee Boreal Chickadee Brown Creeper American Robin Varl ed Thrus h Hermit Thrush 0.5 0.2 V V 0.5 V 1.0 0.3 0.5 V V 0.7 V 1.4 2.3 1.9 V 0.5 V V V 0.8 + V V TABLE W65 .. -MEAN NUMBER OF TERRITORIES OF EACH BIRD SPECIES ON 10-HA CENSUS PLOT,UPPER SUSITNA RIV"ER BASIN,ALASKA,IN 1981 AND 1982 (+=SMALL PORTION OF A BREEDING TERRITORY ON CENSUS PLOT,COUNTED AS 0.1 IN DENSITY AND DIVERSITY CALCULATIONS;V =VISITOR TO PLOT)(Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982,and Kessel pars.comm.) HAB ITAT 1 White Spruca-White Spruce:-----Open Mat and Dwarf-Low Med lum Low-Medium Tall Balsam Paper Paper Paper White White Black Cushion Birch Birch Willow Alder Popl ar Birch Birch (Mixed)Birch (Mixed)Spruce Spruce Spruce Species Tundra Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Forest Forest Forest I Forest II Forest Woodland Woodland.---_.._-----_._------ Swal nson's Thrush ----+4.7 3.3 4.8 7.0 3.5 V V Gray-C'leeked T hrus h -----3.4 V V -V 2.6 2.5 Wheatear V ------- --1.0 Arct I c Warb I er --4.9 3.3 ------2.4 Ruby-Crowned Kinglet -----V V 3.1 2.4 4.2 1.2 2.9 Water Pipit 1.3 Bohem I an Waxw I ng ----- ------V Orange-Crowned Warbler ----0.4 -V -+V -V Yellow-Rumped Warbler ----0.4 4.5 6.9 5.9 7.7 2.0 0.4 2.2 Blackpoll Warble~-----3.5 3.5 1.3 0.3 +1.0 1 .2 Northern Waterthrush --- - - 4.2 +1.9 +V Wilson's Warbler --5.8 6.6 1.8 2.0 2.9 3.8 0.2 V 6.6 Rusty BI ackb I rd -----------V Common Redpoll V V V 0.7 V 1 .3 1.0 1.0 1 .5 0.5 0.3 0.8 Pine Grosbeak ---- - -V -V V Pine Siskin ------V --V White-Wi nged Crossbill ----V V -V V V V V Savannah Sparrow 1 .0 7.1 3.1 9.3 ----0.5 V 1.3 0.4 1 )I ]I I ,J J I )j ~J I _ J } "J -~-})'I TABLE W65 1 }J I 1 1 B -MEAN NUMBER OF TERRITORIES OF EACH BIRD SPECIES ON 10-HA CENSUS PLOT,UPPERSUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA,IN 1981 AND 1982 (+=SMALL PORTION OF A BREEDING TERRITORY ON CENSUS PLOT,COUNTED AS 0.1 IN DENSITY AND DIVERSITY CALCULATIONS;V =VISITOR TO PLOT)(Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982,and Kessel pers.comm.) HABITAT I White Spruce-White Spruce-Open Mat and Dwarf-Low Med lum Low-Medium Tall Balsam Paper Paper Paper White White Black Cus hlon Birch Birch Willow Alder Poplar Birch Bl'rch (Mixed)BI rch (Mixed)Spruce Spruce Spruce Species Tundra Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Forest Forest Forest I Forest II Forest Woodland Woodland Dark-Eyed Junco ----2.6 0.9 2.9 3.4 4.8 3.0 .1.0 1.7 Tree Sparrow -2.7 9.8 11.3 0.8 -----5.8 2.1 White-Crowned Sparrow -0.2 3.1 3.6 +2.5 ----5.5 2.3 Golden-Crowned Sparrow ---0.4 Fox Sparrow -V -V 2.4 4.3 1.5 2.5 V -2.8 3.2 Lincoln's Sparrow ---V -------V Lapl and Longspur 1.0 0.7 Snow Bunting 0.1 lHabitat designations have been modified from Kessel·at al (1982)by Kessel (pers.comm.)to a:>lnclda with habitat types described In Section 3. TABLE W66 MEAN AVIAN HABITAT OCCUPANCY LEVELS,UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,BREEDING SEASON.1981 AND 1982 (Based on Kessel et ai,1982 and Kessel,pers.comm.) - Density Biomass 1No.species (No.Species -(No.breed J ng territorlesl (Gramsl Divers jty Avian Census Plot Species 10 hal 10 hal (H 1 ) Balsam Poplar Forest 19 (14.5)43.0 2658 2.425 -, White Spruce-Paper 18.5 (13)30.6 1455 2.080 Birch Mixed Forest II White Spruce-Paper 15 (12.5)34 .1 1491 2.348 Birch Mixed Forest, Paper Birch Fores-¥-14.5 (9.5)29 .8 1437 2.035 ,- White Spruce Woodland 19 (12.5)63.0 1297 2.120 BI acl<Spruce Wood 1and 18 (12)20.8 1019 2.280 Open White Spruce 20.5 <10.5)16.9 944 1.835 Forest Tall Shrub 14 (9.5)12.2 735 2.035 Low-Med ium Willow Shrub 11 (7.5)35.4 1140 1.680 Medium 8irch Shrub 9 (5)26.6 789 1.489 -Dwarf-Low Birch 1.1 (6)11 .5 408 1.100 S hrub2 Mat-cushion Tundra2 9 (65)5.5 367 1.695 ~ 1 Does not include grouse and ptarmigan 2 Based on 25-ha plots;other plots were 10 ha 1 »1 1 "'"J TABLE W67 I 1 I ~l ] Mixed Paper Birch- White Spruce Forest RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRDS BY HABITAT AND VEGETATION SUCCESSION STAGE,LOWER SUSITNA RIVER FLOODPLAIN,10-21 JUNE 1982.FIGURES ARE THE NUMBER OF BIRDS RECORDED PER 100 MINUTES IN EACH HABITAT Early Success 10naT:--STa-~--~Mld-::-Success-ron-aT-STands Late SuccesSionarsTailds Mixed Paper Birch- Dwarf Tall Tall Mixed Tall Alder-Cottonwood- &Low Medium Willow Alder Tall Immature Cottonwood White Spruce Specit3~___All uv la Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Cottonwood Forest Forest No.minutes of censuses/habItat Goldeneye sp. Semlpalmated Plover Spotted SandpIper Herrl n9 Gull Arctic Tern Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker N.Three-toed Woodpecker AI dar Flycatcher Black-capped Chi ckadee . Brown Creeper Varied Thrush Gray-cheeked Thrush Swal nson's Thrush American Robin RUby-crowned King I et Bo hem I an Waxw i ng Orange-crowned Warbler Yellow Warbler Yellow-rumped Warbler Blackpol I Warbler Nortrorn Waterthrush Wilson's Warbler Common Redpoll Fox Sparrow White-crowned Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco Total number of species Relative abundance/habitat --------2.1--------------- -------13.0~---------~---- *--------4.2--------------- 1.5 1 .5 1.5 13.8 -- 4 +4 8 127 +65 192 19.3 +18.5 25.5 13.3 3.3 3.3 6.7 3.3 5 30 30.0 0.3 *Herrlng Gulls excluded from relative abundance calculations because of trolr clumped distribution In high-density breeding colonies. TABLE W68 COMPARISON OF BREEDING BIRD DENSITIES.1981 AND 1982. UPPER SUSITNA RIVER,IN ALASKA (Based on Kessel.pers.comm.) Density No.Breed i ng (No.territorles/ Species Divers ity (H ')10 hal Avian Census Plot 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 Change Z (%)- Balsam Poplar Forest 16 13 2.55 2•.::0 60.9 25.0 -58.9 White Spruce-Paper 13 13 2.07 2.09 34.6 26.6 -23.1 -Birch (mixed)Forest II White Spruce-Paper 14 11 2.47 2.26 41.8 26.4 -36.8 Birch (mixed)Forest Paper Birch Forest 10 9 2.05 2.02 38.1 21 .4 -43.8 I\l White Spruce Woodland 16 9 2.29 1.95 43.8 19.2 -56.2 -Black Spruce Woodland 13 11 2.43 2.13 24.8 16.8 -32.3 Open White Spruce Forest 8 13 1.83 1.84 15.7 18.1 +15.3 Tall Shrub 10 9 2.05 2.02 12.5 11 .8 -5.6 Low-Medium WII low Shrub 6 9 1.56 1.80 45.4 25.4 -44.1 Med ium Birch Shrub 5 5 1.48 1.49 32.5 20.7 -36.3 ~ Dwarf-Low Birch Shrub 1 7 6 1.29 0.91 !l.9 11.6 0 Mat-cushion Tundra ' 10 7 1.73 1.66 4.8 6.2 +23.1 1 Based on 25-ha plot;other plots were 10 ha. 2 Overal I number of territories on 150 ha of censused plots decreased 37.5 percent.~I! - 1 1 1 I 1 ] TABLE W69 ". ]J }I , -NUMBER OF SMALL MAMMALS CAPTURED PER 100 TRAP NI~ITS DURING FOUR SAMPLING PER IDS BETWEEN AUGUST 1980 AND AUGUST 1982,UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN (Number of Captures are Given In Parentheses.) (from S.O.MacDonald,pers.comm.) Captures per 100 Trap Nights (NO.of Captures) Number of Captures Percent Species Fall 1980 Spring 1981 Fall 1981 Fall 1982 All Trapping Periods of Total Sorex cinereus 9.12 (361)0.93 (39)11.36 (847)0.56 (42)(1289)34.6 ~monticolus 2.42 (96)0 0.64 (48)0.03 (2)(146)3.9 S.arcticus 2.98 (118)0.07 (3)2.31 (172)0.13 (10)(303)8.1 ~~0.13 (5)0 0.07 (5)0 (10)0.3 Clethrionom~rutl Ius 8.41 (333)2.23 (93)10.95 (816)2.89 (216)(1458)39.1 Microtu~pennsylvanicus 0.33 (13)0 0.74 (55)0.47 (35)(103)2.8 M.occonomus 0.61 (24)0.05 (2)2.12 (158)0.53 (40)(224)6.0 M.miurus 0 0 0.91 (68)1.07 (80)(148)4.0 Lemmus sibiricus 0 0.02 (1)0.23 (17)O.15 (11)(29)0.8 Synaptomys boreal is 0 0 0.05 (4)0.15 (11)(15)0.4 Total captures 24.00 (950)3.30 (138)29.38 (2 190)5.98 (447)(3725)100.0 Number of trap nights 3960 4176 7455 7470 TABLE W70 -STANDARDIZED HABITAT NICHE BREADTH VALUES FOR TEN SMALL MAMMAL SPECIES SAMPLED BY SNAP AND PITFALL TRAPPING AT 43 SITES, UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASS I N,FALL 1981 (N i ch9 Breadth Measures were Calculated Using Formula Employed by Krebvs and Wingate 1976) (from Kessel et al 1982)- Species ( d i) Mas ked shrew (464.7) Northern red-backed vole (454.8) Dusky shrew (28.3) Arctic shrew (96.3) Brown lemming (10.2) Tundra vole (87.7) North9rn bog I emmi ng (2.2) Meadow vole (43.8) Pygmy shrew (2.8) Singing vole (42.7) standard lzed Habitat Niche Breadth Valuea 0.60 0.59 0.45 0.38 0.21 0.17 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.05 ...... - - aH ig h va I ues of Bind I cate that a species l'ab itat ni coo i ncllJdes a 'II ide range of habitats 'l'Ihereas low values indicate that a species occurs in very few habitat types. - - 1 J 1 J 1 J 1 J ]1 )I }, TABLE W71 LOSS OF EIGHT.COVER TYPES COMMONLY USED BY MOOSE,IN RELATION TO THEIR AVAILABILITY.THE PROPORTIONATE SEASONAL USE OF EACH TYPE BY RADIO-COLLARED MOOSE IS ALSO SHOWN. WATAN1\-------DEV IL CANYON Proportion of Relocatlons bAreaAffected(ha)Proportionate Area Affected (ha)Proportionate Forest Cover Type Impoundment Construction Loss 0._Impoundment Construction Loss Spring Summer-Fall Winter N Moderate to dense 4267 567 0.03 153 0 0.06 0.56 c 0.43 0.40 791 spruce forest Sparse spruce forest 3633 75 0.03 629 15 0.17 0.29 c 0.28 0.30 504 Birch forest 785 19 0.62 487 3 _d <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 7 Mixed forest 2099 207 0.29 1506 162 0.04 _d Tall shrub 514 37 <0.01 3 0 <0.01 Birch shrub 443 288 0.04 49 18 <0.01 0.14 0.29 0.29 445 Willow -low shrub 717 283 <0.01 18 0 <0.01 Tundra 84 78 <0.01 11 0 <0.01 a Proportionate loss Is e~pressed as the amount of the rover type 10)(ha)In relation to Its total ooverage (ha) in the respective water~ed.(See Section 3.3 -Botanical Resources for a description of the watershed and area estimates of the forest rover types.) b Proportion of moose relocations In that habitat during April-May,June-October,and November-March,respectively. c Ballard et ale (1982)included mixed forest oommunities In their spruce forest classifications and therefore moose use In mixed forest cover types cannot be separately estimated. d Vegetation In areas beyond the Impoundment and ronstructlon zones was mapped at a scale too small to adequately assess the availability of this oover type. Watana Borrow Areas Impoundment Dev i I Canyon Borrow Areas Impoundment TABLE W72 NUMBER OF LAKES WITH MUSKRAT PUSHUPS IN SPRING 198D OCCURRING WITHIN BORROW AREAS AND IMPOUNDMENTS ~.. """ - ,tIfN!Ii!rl TABLE W73 GENERAL TYPES OF IMPACTS TO RAPTORS (From Roseneau et ai,1981) Disturbance Construction and OperatIon Activities -sudden loud noises (e.g.,blasting,gas venting,etc.)can lead to panic flights and damage to nest contents -noise,human presence,etc.,can lead to disruption of dai ty activities Aircraft Passage -sudden appearance and noise can lead to panic flights and damage to nest contents Human Presence Near Nests -Inadvertent -chance occurrence of people (and dogs)near nests;people may be unaware of nest,raptors,or.raptor alarm behavior -del i berate -cur lous passersby,natura II sts,photographers,researchers can have impacts if safeguards are not taken Direct Impacts Intentionally Destructive Acts (as a result of Increased public access) -shooting -legal or Illegal removal of eggs,young,or adults -roiling of rocks off cliff tops -cuttIng of nest trees Man-Made Structures and Obstructions -raptors may be struck on roads where they may perch or feed -may strike wires,fences,etc. -may be electrocuted on power poles -raptors sometimes attack aircraft,or may accidentally strike aircraft Environmental Contaminants -deliberate applicatIon and accidental release of insecticides, herbicides,petrochemicals,and toxic industrial materials can affect raptors and prey by affecting hormones,enzymes,she!I thickness,bIrd behavior,egg ferti I ity and vlabil ity,and survival rates of nestlings, fledglings,immatures and adu Its Changes In Prey Avallabi Iity -decrease In prey abundance or loss of nearby hunting areas may affect territory sIze,efficiency of huntIng,nest occupancy,nesting success,condition of adults and young -changes may result from aircraft overflights,construction and maintenance activities,public access,etc. Habitat Loss Abandonment of area due to destruction,of nest,perch or Important hunting habitat TABLE W74 NUMBER Of KNOWN RAPTOR OR RAVEN NEST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA,THAT WOULD BE INUNDATED BY THE AND DEVIL CANYON RESERVOIRS,OR THAT MAY BE AffECTED BY DEVELOPMENT Of ASSOCIATED ACCESS ROUTES AND TRANSMISSION ROI WATI Nests That Will be flooded Total No.or Destroyed by Impoundment Nests That Ma~ of Recently Borrow Sites and Campsites Access and Trl Active Total No.Recently Recently Nesting of Inactive Active Inactive Active Locations Nesting Nesting Nesting (Percent Nesting Species (1980 -1982)Locations Locations Locations of Total)Locations Cliff-nesting locations Golden Eagle 9 7a 4b 2c (38)a 8ald Eaglee 1 0 1 0 (100)a Gyrfalcon 2f 1 0 0 (0)0 Common Raven 4 17h 1 8i _9j (43 -48)1 Total cliff-nesting locations 16 25 6 9 -10 (37 -39)1 Tree-nesting locations Bald Eaglee 5 2 3k 0 (43)1 Goshawk 2 1 1 l L (66)0 Total tree-nesting locations 7 3 4 0 (40) aDoes not include two nesting locations reported by White (1974),but not relocated in 1980 -1981--these two locat: White's original map,and may represent two of the total seven confirmed inactive golden eagle nesting locations rl bIncludes one nesting location (GE-B)that will be inundated,and that is also approximately 0.1 km north of Borrow cIncludes one nesting location (GE-9)that will be inundated,and that is also approximately 0.1 km north of Borrow within Borrow Site E (see Table W75). dRepeats location GE-11,and thus not included in total number and percentage of total. eCombined cliff and tree-nesting locations for bald eagles are 6,2,4,0,(50),1,0,(13),5,(63),0,0,(0),1, _respectively. fIncludes one nesting location occupied by gyrfalcons in 1974 (White,1974),and occupied in 1980 by an unknown spe gIncludes one gyrfalcon nesting location where young were found in 1974 (White,1974)that was not relocated in 19B hIncludes six confirmed active and six unconfirmed active raven nests reported in 1974 (White,1974). iIncludes three raven nesting locations that will be inundated,and that are also within 0.5 km of Borrow Site J (s jlncludes one raven nesting location reported by White (1974)that may be as low as about 2,000 ft,or as high as a k1ncludes one bald eagle nesting location (8E-2)that is very near maximum operating level (2,185 ft)--this locatio LThis nesting location is only 0.2 km from Borrow Site I and is likely to be affected by Watana development,but it Devil Canyon reservoir if Devil Canyon development occurs. WATANA rES NA be Affected by Total Nests That May be nsmission Routes Affected by Overall Project nactive esting (Percent (Percent ocations of Total)Total No.of Total) [1]d [6]6 (38) 0 (0)1 (100) 0 (0)0 (0) 0 (5)10 -11j (48 -52) (5)17 -18 (41 -44) 0 (14)4 (57) 0 (0)2 (66) 0 (10)5 (50) ions (GE-6 and GE-12)may have been mislocated on ather than ~epresenting two additional nesting locations. !,Site J. i I Site J,and one location (GE-11) 0,(13),1,(13),4,(50),2,(25),6 and (75), lcies (~~obablY gyrfalcons). 10 -1981. ,ee note b above). ibout 2,550 ft (and thus not inundated). 'n is assumed lost as a result of shoreline erosion. will also be inundated at a late~date by the TABLE 'rf74 -Page 2 NUMBER OF KNOWN RAPT OR OR RAVEN f\£ST SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA,THAT WOULD BE INUNDATED BY AND DEVIL CANYON RESERVOIRS,OR THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT OF ASSOCIATED ACCESS ROUTES AND TRANSMISSIOI Nests That Will be Flooded Total No.or Destroyed by Impoundment Nests Tha of Recently Borrow,S~tes and Campsites Access an Active Total No.Recently Recently Nesting of Inactive Active Inactive·Active Locations Nesting Nesting Nesting (Percent Nesting Species (1980 -1982)Locations Locations Locations of Total)Locations Cliff-nesting locations Golden Eagle 9 7C1 0 - 2 (6 -12)1 Bald Eaglee 1 0 0 0 (0)0 Gyrfalcon 2't 0 1 (33)1 Common Raven 4 n h 0 4 (19)0 Total cliff-nesting locations 16 25 0 5 (12)2 Tree-nesting locations Bald Eaglee 5 2 0 0 (0)1 0 OL (O)L 0Goshawk21 tree-nest I ng 0 (10)1Total locations 7 3 .'.. Total Nests That Would be Flooded Total Nes Total No.by Watana and Devil Canyon or by WatanE of Recently Affected by Impoundment Borrow Sites Access ar Active Total No. Nesting of Inactive Locations Nesting (Percent Species (1980 -1982)Locations Total No.of Total)Total No. Cliff-nesting locations _ 88 [2]dGoldenEagle97C17(44 -50) Bald Eaglee 1 0 1 (100)0 Gyrfalcon 2f 1 1 (33)2g Common Raven 4 n h 13-14j (62 -67)1 Total cliff-nesting (51 -54)5locations162521-22 Tree-nestIng locations (43)2BaldEaglee523 2 (66)0Goshawk21 5 (50)2Totaltree-nesting locations 1 3 rHE WATANA ROUTES DEVIL CANYON May be Affected by Transmission Routes Total Nests That May be Affected by Overall Project Inactive Nesting Locations (Percent of Total)Total No. (Percent of Total) o a a (6)2 -3 (12 -18) (a)0 CO) (33 -66)29 (33 -66) (a)4 (19) (7)B (20) (14)1 (14) {O)L Ol (O)l (10)2 (20) -' Its That May be Affected Total Nests That May be ~and Devil Canyon Potentially Affected by Watana 1d Transmission Routes and Devil Canyon Projects (Percent (Percent of Total)Total No.of Total) (12)8 - 9 a (51 -56) (a)1 (100) (33 -66)29 03 -66) (5;14 -15j (67 -72) (12)26 -27 (63 -66) (29)5 (71) (0)2 (66) (20)7 (70) 1 1 1 ]1 I 1 1 TABLE W75 RAPTffi AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNABASIN.ALASKA. THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Nesting Estlmated aLocation Number Elevation Project Action [m (tt») GE-2 610 -655 FII ling Watana Reservoir (2 000 - 2 150) GE-4 564 (1 850)FII ling Watana Reservoir GE-5 549 (1 800)Filling Watana Reservoir [GE-61 [<579 «1 900»)[FII ling Watana Reservoirl Potential Effects Inundation Inundation Inundation [Inundation;however.GE-6 may correspond to nearby GE-5.The elevation of this nesting location is unclear.White (1974)marked this nesting location at a place where suitable nesting habitat does not appear to occur.) GE-8 GE-9 490 -518 (1 600 - 1 700) 490 -518 (1 600 - 1 700) Watana Borrow Site J Fil ling Watana Reservoir Watana Borrow Site J Filling Wa~ana Reservoir Watana Borrow Site J is located within 0.1 km of GE-B and considerable disturbance may result from material excavation during construction of the dam and prior to Inundation as the reservoir Is fll led. Inundation (see potential effect of Watana Borrow Site J) Watana Borrow Site J is located within 0.1 km of GE-9 and considerable disturbance may result from material excavation prior to the fll ling of the reservoir and flooding of this nesting location. Inundation TABLE W76 RAPTeR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'd) Nesting Estlmated aLocation Number Elevation Project Action [m (tt») GE-IO I 189 (3 900)Watana Borrow Site F Denall-Watana Access Road Potential Effects Minimal disturbance Is anticipated although GE-IO lies within 1.2 km of Watana Borrow Site F.The elevation and location of the nest on the opposite side of Tsusena Butte from the borrow site wll I probably minimize any direct influence that excavation and/or transport of materials may have. Minimal disturbance Is antici- pated since the road lies 1.9 km to the northeast. GE-II [GE-12I GE-13 490 -518 (I 600 -I 700 ) [<5491 «I 8001>I 427 -442 (I 400 - I 450) Watana Borrow Site E Transmission Corridor [Filling Devil Canyon .Reservoir) Fill i ng Dev II Canyon Reservoir Nesting location will be physically destroyed as It lies within Watana Borrow Site E. Some di sturbance may result from activities associated with the Installation and maintenance of the power transmission line about 0.1 km from GE-II. [Inundation;however,GE-12 may correspond to nearby GE-13. White (1974)marked this nesting location at a place where suit- able nesting habitat does not appear to occur.1 Inundat Ion J J )1 I J J I J j ,I .J j J )J ,.1 1 1 )1 )1 -I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I TABLE W76 RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'd) Ne.sting Location Number Estlmated a Elevation 1m (ft») F!oj~ct Action Potential ~ffects GE-14 427 -4571 TransmIssion Corridor ( I 400 -I 5001) F II ling Dev II Canyon Reservoir The power transmission line is routed about 0.4 km from GE-14 and some dIsturbance may result from activities associated with its Installation and maIntenance. Possible Inundation.The elevation of this nest site Is unclear.White (1974)marked this nestIng location at a place where suitable nesting habitat does not appear to occur.GE-14 may have been located on one of two smal I cliff areas 1.4 or 2.0 km further downstream. GE-17 GE-18 610 -625 (2 000 - 2 050) 335 (I 100) Transmission Corridor Watana-Devil Canyon Access Road and Bridge Dev II Canyon Dam Construction Min Imal dl sturbance is expected sInce the corridor Is 1.5 km north of GE -17. The access road route Is 0.2 km from and near the top of the cliff on which GE-18 Is located and the access road bridge crosses the river 0.9 km down- stream from the nest location. Considerable disturbance may result from these nearby construction activities. The Dev II Canyon dams I te Is 0.9 km upstream from GE-18 and the construction and maintenance may result In considerable disturbance. TABLE W76 RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Conti d) Nesting Location Number Est i mated a Elevation Project Action fm (tt>J Potential Effects BE-3 579 (1 900)Fil ling Watana Reservoir BE-4 540 -549 FII ling Watana Reservoir (1 775 - 1 800> BE-5 497 -503 Fil ling Watana Reservoir (1 630 -1 650) BE-6 760 (2 500>Denal I-Watana Access Road and Borrow Pits BE-2 BE-8 GYR-2 663 -671 (2 175 - 2 200> 230 (750) 587 (1 925) Fill ing Watana Reservoir Dev II Canyon Ra II road Transmission Corridor Possible Inundation.8E-2 lies near the limit of the impound- ment flooding and the estimated elevation span of this nesting location extends slightly above and below the 2,185-ft maximum operating level of the Watana reservoir. I nundat (on Inundation Inundation This nesting location lies within one of the access road borrow pits and directly in the path of the access road which will result in the destruction of this nesting location. Devil Canyon railroad is 0.5 km from this nesting location and construction and operation activities may result In considerable disturbance. The power transmission line route lies 0.5 km to the north of GYR-2 and some dl stLrbance may result from Installation and maintenance-related activities. J I J I I I I J -J I oJ B ;1 ]l'J J-" 1 l 1 1 1 ]1 1 1 1 J J -1 i 1 TABLE W76 RAPTffi AND RAVEN NESTING LOCAT IONSI N THE UPPER 5US ITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'd) Nesting Lpcation Number GYR-3 ooS-.1 GOS-2 GOS-3 Estlmated a Elevation (riITTfTI 579 -6101 (1 900 - 2 0001) 518 (1 700) 442 (1 450) 549 (1 800) Project Action Devil Canyon Quarry Site K Transmission Corridor Filling Watana Reservoir Watana Borrow Site I Fil ling Devil Canyon Reservoir Watana-Devil Canyon Access Road Borrow Pit Transmission Corridor Potential Effects GYR-3 may lie within this quarry site and material excavation could result In the destruction of this nesting location. The power transmission corridor lies about 0.6 km to the south of GYR-3and some disturbance may result from the installation and rnalntenance activities asso- ciated with the power lines. Inundation ThIs material site Is 0.2 km to the west of 005-2 and consider- able disturbance may result from excavation and transport of materials from this site prior to fll ling the reservoir and flooding of the nesting location. In undat Ion (see potent I aI ef fect ofWatana Borrow Site I) The borrow pit for the access road is 1.0 km west of GOS-3 but minimal disturbance Is ant Ici pated. The transmission corridor lies 1.1 km south of GOS-3 but mini- mal disturbance Is anticipated. TABLE W76 RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN.ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'd) Nesting Location Number R-3 R-4 641 (2 100) 610 -778 (2 000 - 2 550) Proiect Action FIlling Watana Reservoir FIlling Watana ReservoIr Potential Effects Inundation Possible Inundation.The eleva- tion of R-4 Is unclear.White (I 974)marked the genera I loca- tion of R-4 In the vicinity of two small cliff areas on the north bank of the Susltna River. The nest was not found In 1980 or 1981 but Is estimated to be withIn the Indicated elevations and potentially flooded by the 2.002-ft maximum flood level of the Watana reservoir. R-5 641 (2 100)FillIng Watana Reservoir R-6 610 (2 000)FIlling Watana ReservoIr R-7 534 -549 Filling Watana Reservoir (I 750 - 1 000 ) R-8 519 (I 700)Fi 111ng Watana Reservoir R-9 488 (1 600)Watana Borrow SIte J FI II Ing Watana Reservoir Inundation Inundation Inundation Inundation Material excavation from Watana Borrow Site J for dam construc- tIon will occur within the river basIn as close as 0.2 km to R-9. Considerable disturbance may result from these activities prior to the filling of the reservoir and eventual flooding of this nesting locatIon. Inundation (see potentIal effect of Watana Borrow Site J) J I 1 I I J .~J J I J J I 1 , ]1 TABLE W76· J 1 1 1 1 1 RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFfECTED BY THESUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'd) Nesting Location Number Estlmated a Elevatl()n Project Action 1m (ft)1 Potential Effects R-IO R-II R-12 488 (1600) 564 (I 850) 625 (2 050) Watana Borrow Site J Filling Watana Reservoir Watana Borrow Site J Filling Watana Reservoir Watana Camp Denall-Watana Access Road Filling Watana Reservoir Watana Borrow Site J Is 0.1 km from R-IO and considerable dis- turbance may result from excava- tion and transport of materials from this material site prior to the filling of the reservoir and eventual flooding of this nesting location. Inundation (see potential effect of Watana Borrow Site J) Watana Borrow Site J Is 0.1 km from R-II and considerable dis- turbance may resu It frbm excava- tion and transport of materia I.s from this material site prior to the filling of Watana reservoIr and eventual flooding of this nesting location. Inundation (see potential effect of Watana Borrow Site J) The camp Is 1.4 km west of R-12. Minimal disturbance Is antici- pated as a result of construc- tion or use of the camp. The access road Is 1.9 km west of R-12.Little or no distur- bance Is anticipated as a result of the proximity of the access road. Inundation TABLE W76 RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASiN,ALASKA, THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (Cont'dl Nesting Estimated aLocation Number Elevation Project Action 1m (ftl) R-13 549 (1 800)Watana Camp Denali-Watana Access Road and Borrow Pit Watana Damslte R-14 549 -580 Watana Borrow Site H (1 800 - 1 900) Potential Effects R-13 lies within 1.9 to 2.8 km of the camp,acceSs road borrow pit and Watana damslte;however, little disturbance Is antici- pated. This borrow sHe Is 0.8 km from R-14 and some dl sturbance may result from excavation and transportation of materials from this site. R-15 519 -580 (1 700 - 1 900 ) Watana Borrow Site H This borrow site Is 0.2 km from R-15 and considerable distur- bance may result from excavation and transportation of materials from this site. R-16 442 (1 450)Fil ling Devil Canyon Reservoir R-17 442 (1 450)F III I ng Dev i I Canyon Reservoir R-18 427 (1 400)Filling Devil Canyon Reservoir R-20 366 (1 200)filling Devil Canyon Reservoir R-21 427 (1 400)Devil Canyon Dam Construction Inundation Inundation Inundation Inundation The damsite Is 0.7 km upstream from R-21 and considerable dis- turbance may result from construction-related activities associated with the dam. !]l ]I J J ))]I 1 )I --1 I --~1 )1 1 1 1 ]1 -, TABLE W76 RAPTffi.AND RAVEN NESTING LOCATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA, THAT MAYBE AFFECTED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (ContI d) Nesting Location Number Estimated a Elevation [ii\(ft») Project Action Potential Effects Watana-Devll Canyon Access Road This road Is 0.2 km from R-21 and lies near the top of the cliff on which R-21 was indicated by White (1914). Considerable disturbance may result from the construction and/or use of this road. aDifferences occur between elevations given here and those reported by Kessel et al (1982). Original estimates were obtained by attempting to locate nests as accurately as poss Ible on USGS 1:63 360 maps with contour intervals If 100 ft (majority)or 50 ft (Talkeetna Mountainsc...n,but It was often difficult to precisely locate nests and to locate them relative to tightly-spaced contour Intervals (Cooper pers.comm.,1982).,All elevations have been reviewed and some rev i s Ions were made;however,In some cases,est I mates given here may conta I n errors of as much as 100 ft.All elevations must be considered approximate (unless otherwise noted) until the majority are rechecked with an altimeter (hand-held or helicopter). TABLE W?? LINEAR DISTANCES OF CLIFFS IN VICINITY OF PROPOSED IMPOUNDMENTS,AND DISTANCES THAT WOULD BE INUNDATED, SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT CI iffs were ranked as follows. A -"Good potential raptor cl iffs"(sol id subsrate generally, currently used by nesting raptors). 8 -Fa ir or IIIOderatepotent iaI for nest i ng {1 ess so lid and less massive subsrates generally,not currently used by nest i ng raptors. C -Poor potential for nesting,less desirable,loose soil or gravel cutbanks,or very low rock,not currently used, nor like 1y to be used by nest i ng raptors. ~, ~, - - TABLE·W7S· FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE SENSITIVITY OF RAPTORS TO DISTURBANCES (From Roseneau et ai,1981) Characteristics of the Disturbance -type of disturbance -severity (speed,loudness,suddenness,persistence,etc.) -frequency of occurrence Characteristics of the Bird the individual (individual differences in response) -sex -age -'mood'(a factor of recent activities,weather) -territorial status (breeder,territorial non-breeder,or non-territorial floater) -sTage of .annual life cycle (winter,migration,courtship,egg-laying, rearing you ng ,etc.) -occurrence of other disturbances or natural stresses at the same time -previous experience with this type of disturbance (habituation may occur) Topography -nearness of disturbance to raptor or nest -relative elevations (is nest or raptor above or below the disturbance? by what distance?) -presence of screening features (trees,intervening hill) -direction faced by nest relative to sun,wind,disturbance -type of nest (exposed ledge,overhung ledge,cave) -distance of nest above foot of cliff and below lip of cliff (i.e., 'security'of nest) Time of Day Weather at Time of Disturbance Potential Predators Nearby Type of Prey Uti I ized by the Bird (species,location,abundance) TABLE W78a PROPORTIONATE HABITAT LOSS FOR BIRDS ~ Area Affected (ha)...~ Percent Percent of 2ofUpperDevilDeviJUpperBasin Habitat Watana Watana Susitn~Canyon Canyon (Wa1"ana and Type Impoundment Construction Basin Impoundment Construction Devi I Canyon Wood Iand spruce 4 267 567 2.6 153 0 2.7 forest Open spruce 3 633 75 3.1 629 15 3.7 forest Birch forest 785 19 62.3 487 3 100.0 Mixed forest 2 099 207 5.8 006 162 8.8 Tall shrub 514 37 0.4 3 0 0.4 Birch shrub 443 290 2.2 49 18 2.4 i!J5ll!!'l Wi II ow and 717 323 0.2 18 0 0.2 mixed low shrub Sedge tundra 84 8 <0.1 11 0 <0.1 habitat Mat and cushion 0 70 0.1 0 0 0.1 tundra -, 1Percent loss is expressed as proportion 10s1"over u,1?f proportion of total availabill1"y of that habitat. 2Some stands of birch forest in the upper basin will be unaffected.but are too small to be mapped as a separate cover. .- ~. -- Timing Winter Arrival and courtship Egg-laying Incubation Nest I I ng phase FIedg ling phase Night General TABLE W79 INFLUENCE Or TIMING OF DISTURBANCE ON THE POSSIBLE EFFECTS ON RAPTORS (From Roseneau et a I,1981) Possible Effects of Disturbance Raptor may abandon nest,roosting cl iff,or hunting area (e.g.,gyrfalcon) Migrant raptor may be forced to use alternative nest site (If available),may remain but refuse,to breed or may abandon nest site Partial clutch may be abandoned and remainder (or full clutch)laid at alternative nest;breeding effort may cease or site may be abandoned Eggs may be chilled,overheated,or preyed upon if parents are kept off nest too rong;sudden f Iushi ng from nest may destroy eggs;male may cease incubating; clutch or site may be abandoned Chilling,overheating,or predation of young may occur if adults are kept off nest;sudden flushing of parent may injure or ki II nestl ings;malnutrition and death may result from missed feedings;premature flying of nestl ings from nest may cause injury or death;adults may abandon nest or site Missed feedings may result in malnutrition or death; fledglings may become lost if disturbed In high winds; increased chance of injury due to extra moving about; parents may abandon brood or site Panic fl ight may occur and birds may become lost or suffer injury or death Undue expense of energy;increased risk of Injury to alarmed or defending birds;missed hunting opportunities TABLE W79a ESTIMATED NUMBER OF BREEDING PAIRS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED UPLANq BIRDS THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (Based on Kessel et aI,1982,and Kessel pers.camm.) Watana Dev i I canfon Impoundment Construction Total Impoundment Construct on Total Access Grand Total Species 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 Goshawk 36 2 38 6 <1 6 1 45 Spruce grouse 209 96 22 8 231 104 101 36 5 101 411 39 10 371 155 Ruffed grouse 36 2 38 6 19 25 1 63 1 Willow ptarmigan 11 9 9 5 20 14 <1 1 <1 1 4 1 25 15 Rock ptarm i gan 16 13 29 1 1 5 35 White-tailed ptarmigan 1 1 1 Lesser golden plover 4 4 1 1 Greater yellowlegs 4 4 1 1 5 5 <1 <1 5 5 Common snipe 407 27 50 10 457 37 14 1 14 1 1 2 472 40 Balrd's sandpIper 6 14 6 14 2 2 8 16HaIrywoodpecker105<1 11 116 <1 52 1 10 62 1 22 3 200 4 Downy woodpecker 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 N.3-toed woodpecker 395 182 24 11 419 193 78 31 4 1 82 32 13 4 514 229 Alder flycatcher 1 1 3 4 Olive-sided flycatcher 36 2 38 6 <1 6 1 45 Horned I ark 7 2 10 2 17 1 <1 1 1 4 3 22 Gray jay 473 914 37 30 510 944 113 122 11 18 124 140 34 38 668 1 122 Black-capped chickadee 1 1 3 3 3 3 5 5 8 9 Boreal chickadee 669 313 72 33 741 346 270 151 26 29 296 180 53 58 1 090 584 Brown creeper 105 104 11 11 116 115 149 50 10 10 159 60 24 20 299 195 American robin 26 390 30 41 56 431 8 18 8 18 4 3 68 452 Var Ied thrush 2 014 867 137 63 2 151 930 646 316 61 31 707 347 176 78 3 034 1 355 Hermit thrush 988 407 61 14 1 049 421 489 196 38 1 527 197 100 13 1 676 631 Swainson's tfirush 2 921 2 487 219 185 3 140 2672 952 762 135 94 1 087 856 307 212 4 534 3740 Gray-cheeked thrush 1 123 1 020 161 125 1 284 1 145 235 40 235 40 16 11 1 535 1 196 Arct Ic warb Ier 475 405 244 217 719 622 24 22 4 5 28 27 63 59 810 708 RUby-crowned kinglet 3 554 2 934 317 256 3 871 3 190 535 617 48 70 583 687 118 161 4572 4 038 Water pipit 4 14 4 14 1 5 5 19 Orange-crowned warbler 51 4 55 5 1 6 2 63 Yellow-rumped warbler 3 907 3 196 342 260 4 249 3 456 1 440 918 168 103 1 608 1 021 374 224 6 231 4 701 ~i J I .~I 1 I j J J I I .J J ~ -,i 1.I 1 1 1 1 j -J I R I ! TABLE ~J79a ESTIMATED NUMBER OF BREEDING PAIRS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED UPLANq BIRDS THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED BY THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (Cont'dl (Based on Kessel et ai,1982,and Kessel pers.canm.l Watana Dev i I Canyon Impoundment Construction Total Impoundment Construction Total Access Grand Total Species 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 1981 1982 Blackpoll warbler 1 207 666 125 51 1 332 717 336 207 23 9 359 216 66 23 1 757 956 Northern waterthrush 271 147 27 15 298 162 139 74 24 13 163 87 64 33 525 282 Wi I son's warbl er 2 006 1 124 646 280 2 652 1 404 450 291 48 35 498 326 240 117 3 390 1 847 Comll1On red po II 1 194 557 157 43 1 351 600 370 70 50 2 420 72 119 8 1 890 680 Savannah sparrow 1 486 849 473 438 1 959 1 287 60 92 8 20 68 112 155 148 2 182 1 547 Dark-eyed Junco 2 970 3 004 435 233 3 405 3237 736 793 85 81 821 874 214 194 4 440 4 305 Tree sparrow 2 789 1 507 977 560 3 766 2 067 130 67 13 10 143 77 230 136 4 139 2 280 White-crowned sparrow 1 602 1 241 403 295 2 005 1 536 69 49 4 2 73 51 76 43 2 154 1 630 Golden-crowned sparrow 57 26 83 1 1 6 90 Fox sparrow 1 621 2 064 201 229 1 822 2 293 197 306 19 29 216 335 68 76 2 106 2 704 Lap Iand long spur 18 11 22 16 40 27 2 1 1 <1 3 I 8 6 51 34 Snow bunt i ng 1 1 1 2 TOTAL 32 602 24 713 5 243 3 506 37 845 28 219 7 606 5 254 81 I 569 8 417 5 823 2 607 1 710 48 869 35 752------------ lEstimates were made by extrapolating by habitat the number of breeding pairs per census plot to the area affected by various proJect~components. TABLE waD ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE LOSS OF BREEDING PAIRS OF SMALL-AND MEDIUM-SIZE~ UPLAND BIRDS FROM VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Watana Dev II Canyon Construction Construction Access Species Impoundment Zone Total Impoundment Zone Route Total Goshawk 3.0 0.2 3.2 0.5 <0.1 0.6 4.3 Spruce grouse 5.3 0.6 5.9 2.6 1.0 9.5 Ruf fed grouse 3.0 0.1 3.1 0.5 1.6 5.2 Wi Ilow ptarmigan 1.3 1.0 2.3 0.1 0.5 2.9 Rock ptarmIgan 1.4 1.1 2.5 O.1 0.4 3.0 White-tailed ptarmigan Lesser golden plover 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 Greater yellowlegs 0.4 0.1 0.5 <0.1 0.5 Common snipe 2.2 0.3 2.5 0.1 <0.1 2.6 Baird's sandpiper 0.1 0.1 0.1 Ha J ry woodpecker 5.3 0.6 5.9 2.6 0.5 1.1 10.1 Downy woodpecker N.3-toed woodpecker 3.2 0.2 3.4 0.6 <0.1 0.1 4.1 Alder flycatcher Olive-sided flycatcher 3.0 0.2 3.2 0.5 <0.1 3.7 Horned Iark O.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 Gray jay 1.7 0.1 1.8 0.4 <0.1 0.1 2.'3 Black-capped chickadee Boreal chickadee 4.5 0.5 5.0 1.8 0.2 0.4 7.4 Brown creeper 5.3 0.6 5.9 7.8 0.5 1.2 19.9 Amer i can rob In 0.2 0.2 0.4 <0.1 <0.1 0.5 Var I ed thrush 3.1 0.2 3.3 1.0 O.1 0.2 4.6 Hermit thrush 2.7 0.2 2.9 1.3 0.1 0.3 4.6 Swalnson's thrush 4.7 0.3 5.0 1.5 0.2 0.5 7.2 Gray-cheeked thrush 1.9 0.3 2.2 0.4 <0.1 2.6 Arctic warbler 0.2 0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.4 Ruby-crowned kinglet 3.4 0.3 3.7 0.5 <0.1 0.1 4.3 \~ater pip i t 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 Orange-crowned warbler 0.5 <0.1 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.6 Yellow-rumped warbler 5.0 0.4 5.4 1.9 0.2 0.5 8.0 •J I ,I'I I ~i I I t I I J I I I J 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 J 1 J J ] TABLE WaD ESTIMATED PERCENtAGE LOSS OF BREEDING PAIRS OF SMALL-AND MEDIUM-SIZE~ UPLAND BIRDS FROM VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (Cont'd) Watana Devl !'s Canyon Construction Construction Access Species Impoundment Zone Total Impoundment Zone Route Total Blackpoll warbler 3.2 0.3 3.5 1.0 0.1 0.2 4.8 Northern waterthrush 5.5 0.5 6.0 2.8 0.5 1.3 11.6 Wilson's warbler 0.4 0.1 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.6 Common redpo II 1.2 0..1 1.3 0.4 O.1 0.1 1.9 Savannah sparrow 0.2 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.4 Dark-eyed Junco 2.5 0.4 2.9 0.6 0.1 0.2 3.8 Tree sparrow 0.3 0.1 0.4 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.5 White-crowned sparrow 1.7 0.4 2.1 O.1 <0.1 <0.1 2.3 Golden-crowned sparrow <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 Fox sparrow 6.6 0.8 7.4 0.8 O.1 0.3 8.6 Lapland longspur 0.2 0.3 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.7 Snow bunt I ng 0.1 0.1 0.1 0..1 l Bird populations In the upper Susltna basin were estimated by extrapolating the breeding bird densities from census plots,by habitat,to the upper basin.The values In the body of this table are the estimated numbers of breeding pairs affected by each project activity (from table Bird Impacts 2)divided by the estimated number of pairs of that species In the upper basin,expressed as a percent. TABLE W81:THE SUCCESS OF ARTIFICIAL NESTING STRUCTURES INSTALLED ON POWER POLES AND TRANSMISSION TOWERS (EXCERPTED FROM oLENDORFF ET AL.1981). Reference Illinois Power Co.1972 Si e t ke.(In Saurola 1978) Stahlecker 1975, 1979 Nelson 1978, 1979a,1980b Nelson 1980a, 198Gb BrIdges 1980 Lee 1980 Location ILlinois Eas t Ger man y Color ado Id aha Id aha Oregon North Dakota Oregon, Washington, Montana Type and No. of Structures 1 Wooden Nestbox 30 Iron Platforms on Poles 12 Wooden Platforms 1975 25 Nestboxes 1976 25 Nestboxes 1977 25 Nestboxes 6 Wooden Platforms (2 to 4 Years Each) 40 Steel Platforms on Towers 20 Wooden or Wire Mesh Platforms 1977 4 Wood en/ Fiberglass Platforms 1978 5 Wooden/ Fiberglass Platforms 1979 5 Wooden/ Fiberglass Platforms *No.Occupied (and species) (Kestrel) Almost All Used Each Year (Ospreys) None 12 (Kestrel) 19 (Kestrel) 24 (Kestrel) 4 (Golden Eagle) 1 (R e d -tail e d Hawk) (Osprey) **1 (Bald Eagle) Too Early for Results Too Early for Resul ts (Red-tailed Hawk) (Osprey) (Osprey) (Osprey) - - *Minimum number of times used in tIme periods specified. **A pair occupied a platform early one season,but did not nest successfully. - PARTIAL AVOIDANCE ~••••ll!f!I.....~TOTAL AVOIDANCE NO AVOIDANCE SOME MINIMIZATION NO MINIMIZATION PARTIAL RECTIFiCATION ........ TOTAL RECTIFICATiON NO RECTIFICATION SOME REDUCTION NO REDUCTION PARTIAL COMPENSATION TOTAL COMPENSATION NO COMPENSATION OPTION ANALYSIS (PREPARED BYTES)FIGURE E.3.1 J 1 1 J J 1 1 1 1 design and construction planning ~ permit application and review construction tf' field studies impact quantification ~ mitigation strategies Mitigation Planning monitoring, long term mitigation RE4ATJONSHIP OF FIELp ~TUPIES AND M9NI1!ORING TO IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND.MITIGATION PLANNING ;,:, FIGURE E.3.2 I -)1 j 1 J 1 -J )1 1 ~ N ~ "I I I I /~ -'/; I I Map Area I'I I / ;/ //, .,,----..,-~/--- I I I I I I I I, I, \, ....-'....,,,, '..."'.........,, \ ----, Drainage Boundary:: I~__....J . SOURCE:ADF a G 1981 SUSITNA RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN FIGURE E 3.3 1 1 1 J 1 1 )1 1 )-]] SUSITNA BASIN WITH FIELD STATIONS AND MAJOR GLACIAL STREAMS DEFINED. ADULT ANADROMOUS INVESTIGATIONS,SU HYDRO STUDIES,1981. FIGURE E 3.4 SOURCE ADF AND G 1981 b - .... I~.Il0...nlV-er Mi~·e i SLOUGH LOCATIONS AND PRIMARY TRIBUTARIES OF THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM THE CONFLUENCE OF THE CHULITNA AND TALKEETNA RIVERS TO DEVIL CANYON,ADULT ANADROMOUS. SU HYDRO STUDIES.1981 . .....SOURCE~ADF,sG I~Ellb FIGURE E 3.5 Mc:kenzie Creek ,••River Mile -0(MOose Slc.UIl" Lowar MckenzIe Creek Fit'~of JuJy CreeK Chase Craek Siougn S ;>0 A Lana Creek Slough 8 \~ - r - SLOUGH LOCATIONS AND PRIMARY TRIBUTARIES OF THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM THE CONFLUENCE OF THE CHULITNA AND TALKEETNA RIVERS TO DEVI L CANYON,ADULT ANADROMOUS, SU HYDRO STUDIES t 1981 .(CONT.)· FIGURE E 3.6 SOURCE:AOF,.8G 1981 b - ...Siougn 20 ~Siougn 19 Slouqlt 10>0 g. o ~Slouql1 91. SLOUGH LOCATIONS AND PRIMARY TRIBUTARIES OF THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM THE CONFLUENCE OF THE CHULITNA AND TALKEETNA RIVERS TO DEVIL CANYON,ADULT ANADROMOUS, SU HYDRO STUDIES,198 [.(CONT.). SOURCE:ADF.I5GI98J FIGURE E 3.7 - Portage Creek I .-River Mile I Deyil Canyol SLOUGH LOCATIONS AND PRIMARY TRIBUTARIES OF THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM THE CONFLUENCE OF THE CHULITNA AND TALKEETNA RIVERS TO DEVIL CANYON,ADULT ANADROMOUS, SU HYDRO STUDIES,1981.(CONT.) SOURCE:ADF,lSG 1981 FIGURE E 3.8 j ,1 -)J )1 ]J j --1 !J ] fIGURE E.3.8a:TIMING OF LIrE STAGES or SALMJN IN THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM TALKEETNA TO DEVIL CANYON (Cont'd) o----.--..------_.---- - -..--- - Coho I I I I I I I I I I I -Adult Passage •••••• -Spawning ••., -Incubat ion/Emergence ••••••••••• -Rearing -Smolt ing ,.••• Sockeye -Adult Passage •••••••••• -Spawning ••••• -Incubatlon/Emergence •••••••••• -Rearing •••••• -Outmigration*...-.... *Juvenile sockeye appear to be absent from this reach. Source:ADF&G 1981a,1981b,1981c,1981d,1981e,198H,and 1982a. Trent 1982;and Morrow 1980. Intense activity ••••••Moderate act iv ity J 1 1 )J 1 1 1 J )1 I 1 FIGURE E.3.8a:TIMING OF LIFE STAGES OF SALMON IN THE SUSITNA RIVER FROM TALKEETNA TO DEVIL CANYON DNOctSAJulJMAMFebJ------..---- -----_..-------- ----..-.--- Chinook I I I I I I I I I I I -Adult Passage •••• -Spawning -Incubation/Emergence •••••••• -RearIng -Smolting ••••• Pink -Adult Passage ••••• -Spawning •••• -Incubation/Emergence •••••••• -Outmigration ..--... Chum -Adult Passage ••••• -Spawning •••• -Incub at ion/Emerg ence ••••••••• -Rearing ••••••• -Outm igratlon ••••• Intense activity ••••••Moderate actlv ity '.1 )I ,i i ~i 1 1 ~I NATURAL PERCOLATION REARI NG POND L r '-.ir-r1 H !'2 2 I 2, rX--X~.'.~ \I FISH SCREEN (100 LIN.FT.) I FLOW CONTROL I WEIR LENGTH (t200 FTJ SUSITNA RIVER FISHERY MITIGATION CHANNEL TYPE SPAWNING FACILITY, NO SCALE ~. ~_f NATURAL .~PERCOLATION RIVER MIN.WATER DEPTI SPAWNING GRAVEUS SECTION A-A 20 FT.WIDE BED SECTION FISH SCREEN ~ 200'REARING POND FLOW CONTROL WEIR \./', SIDESLOPE BOTTOM STABILIZATION fIGURE E 3.9 )1 'I I 'I 1 1 1 J 1 60 fT. BARRIER ROCK I'6"WATER DEPTH I'PAVING STONE ~~I~.··=Z'"\~.',"..\,...'"\.-\..\..'\:s \.."\ \....\..II..,'"'"~Iii ;::::111 §flll =:111 =111 ;E.,~,=111::...-0ii'Ei~'::111= '3'SPAWNING GRAVEL SECTION A-A NO SCALE SUSITNA RIVER FISHERY MITIGATION CONCEPTUAL DRAWING MAIN.STREAM SPAWNING BED NO SCALE _---='SL=OUGH~?S~~N.P~~T~ ...RIVER FIGURE E ]..10.~----- I 1 )J 1 )-,I 1 J )~J i ] SlOES LOPE STABILIZATION 'LEAN OUT ~~f'"PERFP!PE @4 O.C. SECTION A-A RIVER EXISTING SLOUGH SUSITNA RIVER FISHERY MITIGATION UPWELLING TYPE SPAWNING CHANNEL NO SCALE WATER SUPPLY LINE FIGURE E 3.11 :., 'J:"._ ."·1 ~., -i.-:1-"7',:---,. 'I'.b"'>:''" '~' p.y.,j !""'.T~"J:'-'Jl' _,_.;_,..~__"-,c- . .;'..;~........',;..:~--_:,-.~-" ;;f=_"".:,~_"~,l...-.I'.....;,\...-l VEGETATION MAP OF TH PREPARED BY TES I UN IVERSITY OF ALASKA {~,...._._.-~:._~ .-~~ ".-..~.....°11o.--~ ~~. 0·"-,,,--'o ._~~_. EJI _.,.,.~.•-~...._.o ""..~~,..,~ m""'~'A"_1 0-,·-0_.0 ,_ EJ ._- ,I -,,··:·c:...:......:... ',,";' Miles .-0 10 20 i I I 0 10 20 30 Kilometers 0 p-r:-.--- UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN FIGURE Wl J 1 1 1 i -1 -I J 1 1 l J OPEN WATER ZONE -USUALLY GREATER THAN 2.1 rn IN DEPTH -LITTLE TO NO AQUATIC VEGETATION SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION DEEP WATER ZONE -WATER FROM 0.8 TO .2.1 rn IN DEPTH -USUALLY DOMINATED BY YELLOW POND LILY -SIZE VARIABLE DEPENDING ON BOTTOM MORPHOLOGY SHALLOW WATER ZONE -WATER 0.15 TO 0.8 rn IN DEPTH -USUALLY DOMINATED BY BUR REED,HORSETAIL, MARE'S TAIL,AND BLADDERWORT -SIZE VARIABLE DEPENDING ON BOTTOM MORPHOLOGY -SPECIES COMPOSITION INFLUENCED BY SUBSTRATtt EMERGENT WETLAND PERIPHERY -WATER FROM GROUND SURFACE TO 0.3rn IN DEPTH -MAY CONTAIN A FLOATING MAT OF VEGETATION -DOMINANTS INCLUDE SEDGE,COlTON GRASS,REED BENT GRASS, MARSH FIVEFINGER,BUCKBEAN,AND SPHAGNUM MOSS -SIZE INI'I.UENCED BY BOTTOM MOI1PHOLOGY AND SUnROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY (FROM McKENORICH at 01.1982) A SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE DOMINANT VEGETATION ASSOCIATED WITH MANY OF THE LAKES AND PONDS OF THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN FIGURE W2 I J 1 1 1 J I J I J 1 }i 1 SUSITNA RIVER -~-0 0 BARE SURFACE::0 ..!..INITIAL STAGE H--J>~ g~T I BARE SURFACE I:t~-<N SALT CRUST n1(1)Cc:W HORSE TAIL ;H8 N OPEN SHRUB BALSAM POPLAR ~I UI WILLOW om ALDER 3:(1)UI WILLOW AND/OR 0 I CLOSED SHRUB ALDER PLUS I:a~Z l>-Ci'l 0 BALSAM POPLARf'I Zo 0 "TI 02 "TI ~5c: f;;.... VI ~:::lJ YOUNG BALSAM POPLAR 0iiiJc:I cc:I b ":::lJ ~AND /OR ALDER r<::I:it!0 "TI » lTIlTI 0 0 "Zf'I :0 - :<f1'I J>(I)~zc:~CD .,.7".MATURE BALSAM POPLAR0C~I 5 ~YOUNG WHITE SPRUCE ~....0 !ij j -ALDER<2 0 (J) fijJ> ::0p}"Tl N,,5 UI II t'W~OLD BALSAM POPLAR SI 0 ~.~--:\d'~;~YOUNG WHITE SPRUCE coO UI 0)"'0-t N 21-»0 ~Ill ~MATURE WHITE ~-n Z 0.......I G>lJI -t.J(l 1 _SPRUCEc:0 ;;0 0 lT1 :E:w 30262218141284 Aspen,Vegetative Reproduction f ,.,.....Birch,Seed Reproduction ///"'~ Birch,Vegetative /\ Reproduction ----/---..\\ \("'../I .......y /\ / I "...-1-':_.-......'"\,-:,.'-;y""....Willow,SeedI./... /'~Reproduction Willow,Vegetative ....~\ .......'.'-: Reproduction ......'...~ ~._~~:~. ----'-..--....-...... lU-..c c 0 > <I: lU lJ) ~ 0 lo... £D '+- 0 lJ)-C :J 0 E <I: lU > C-lUn::: 0 - Ye,ars - ..- I RELATIVE AMOUNTS OF MOOSE BROWSE AVAILABLE COMPARED WITH THE T1 ME SINCE FIRE OR OTHER DISTURBANCE IN INTERIOR ALASKA (FROM WOLFF AND ZASADA 1979) FIGURE W4 "... - - - DRY -'.IARM WET -COLD ..... PATTERNS OF FOREST SUCCESSION FOLLOWING FIRE IN ALASKA (FROM VIERECK a SCHANDELMEIER 1980) FIGURE W5 1 -~J i 1 ]J /.-)J I I I RELA TIVE DENSITIES OF MOOSE AS DETERMINED FROM STRA T1FICA TION AND CENSUS FLIGHTS MADE DURING NOVEMBER 1980. ••••••••COUNT AREA BOUNDARY o 10 20 30mi.___'Io10203040km. /-- (/'-'" J DEVIL CANYON //DAMSITE o LOW DENSITY o DENSITY MEDIUM DENSITY HIGH DENSITY LEGEND .. BOUNDARIES OF ESTABLISHED MOOSE COUNT AREAS PREPARED BY TES I ADF&G FIGURE W6 [iii] ALASKA I .j I o 20k.. i 10n NORTH f""" I '1''''''' ~ I .-ZONES EMPLOYED BY MODAFFERI (1982)TO ESTIMATE MOOSE DENSITIES WITHIN RIPARIAN COMMUNITIES ALONG THE SUS1TNA RIVER FIGURE W7 )-I -,l'I l'J ]J 1 'I ])B AUG ISEPTIOCT CALF OF COLLARED COW -1980 RADIO-COLLARED CALF -1977 -78 CALF OF RADIO-COLLARED COW- 1977 -,78 J U L Y )(•••••tC o---.Q •• 10-1415-19'20-24 25-29 '30 - 3 Aug .Sept Oct J U N EMAY 26-30'31 -4'5 -9 "10-14 '15-19"20-24"25-2930 - 4 LL o W 60-- C.9« I- Z w Ua:40 w 0. 100 1 I I ---t-I--+1-=--+-:~---i--=I I I I l~-+I--+-I~+~r---i~=I IA-~_.o-~~~_I-t--.,.tr __-0"__..."::r.~;',,:j.t_::'3~~b~!J p----<>---..,.~~...•.....,.•.. I'-.....to"••••.'/-. ••./•••••f(•• .....I rl ..I,./ :'d/ :/ ,/ /: I :~I :'. /:/. /: I ;i w r/••••. > /..' _I lI' ..../«I ...J / :J d 2 :::>u >- I--...J«.-a:80- o ~ OATES OF MORTALITIES OF COLLARED AND UNCOLLARED MOOSE CALVES DURING 1977,1978,AND 1980 IN THE NEL£HINA AND UPPER SUSITNA BASIN,ALASKA (FROM BALLARD ET.AL.1982) FIGURE W8 1 1 J -)j i ~I 1 1 I 1 1 * o fIGURE w9111R I ~ •FEMALES *MALES LEGEND ~. * ** * o 10 20 Miles-==]o 10 20 30 Kilometers • C'r~(¥ "" ~o'4 ~ • * .<,- ~u • • H'(J';-~ Slt'pk111 {(Ike >.~~'~co,-" ,,"0c 6 DISTRIBUTION OF NELCHINA RADIO-COLLARED CARIBOU DURING THE CALVING PERIOD,15 MAY THROUGH 10 JUNE,1980 AND 1981 $)rk ~ /lfi(I{I,~ PREPARED BY TESIADF&G ---L ~/~\""', '1.\\\\ ~~;c "/ ?/ -~ ~,'-~' I 1 J 1 $-1 J I --1 -.~. Jji ]1 ]I I ~.~ o FIGURE W10 \-\IGHWAY ~ LEGEND *UPPER TALKEETNA RIVER SUBHERD •CHUNllNA HillS SUBHERD o UPPER SUSITNA -NENANA SUBHERD ~ o 10 20 Miles--] o 10 20 30 Kilometers -"-~ C~,,;;o-'4~e{>+ o gf! '" o * o *\*l it.*\*J* * *"..~te.~",,0 c rj LOCATION OF RADIO-COLLARED CARIBOU IN SUBHERDS, 9 MAY 1980 THROUGH 22 SEPTEMBER 1981 Hi(.I'';- •• Steplhlll Lake • •• • \"l\ ~"e,," • ).,I"""'\~ l O~"h.• ) f-~ ?/ ~ ~~2> PREPARED BY TESIADF&G ._....]I -]1 I 1 ]1 ~..)]E 7000'- 6000 t-GOOOw w u. z 4000 z o. -3000 t- oe( > IU -I 2000' IU ~t ~~I;j ~I~i I Jr t'··· H 1000 RUTAUTUMNBUMMEROALVINGoIWINTER'_JI SPRING·I I II · CARIBOU -SEASONAL ELEVATION USE BY FEMALE (LIGHT BOX)AND MALE (DARK BOX) CARIBOU FROM THE MAIN NEICHINA HERD.HORIZONTAL LINE,MEAN:BOX,95 0/0 CONFIDENCE INTERVAL LINE,RANGE.(FROM PITCHER 1982). (FROM PITCHER 198Za l.FIGURE Wll ]1 t ']J i i I ]i 1 1 LEGEND DALL SHEEP STUDY AREA 0 AERIAL SURVEY AREAS '\\\\\~:." o 10 ZO MILES •.i Ii.'_I i o ~~~ ~\ -<.'f.~ u0 vf. MT.WATANA GREBE MTN. LOCATION OF DALL SHEEP STUDY AND AER IAL SURVEY AREAS sus/rNA LAKE FIGURE W12 1 ])j -~I ]1 1 )I ]1 ]] ). J ( t. o KNOWN WOLF PACK FL FISH LAKE JC JAY CREEK PC PORTAGE CREEK S SUSITNA SS SUSITNA-SINONA T TOLSONA TC HONE CREEK T M HONE -MAC LAREN W WATANA .......SUSPECTED WOLF PACK AND CONCENTRATION AREA FIGURE W13 SUSPECTED LOCATIONS AND TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES OF WOLF PACKS INHABITATING THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AREA DURING 1980 AND 1981 I 1 --J 1 )J 1 )I 1 -)j I 1 1 1 GENERAL LOCATION AND YEAR OF USE OF _15 OBSERVED WOLF DEN AND RENDEZVOUS SITES DISCOVERED IN THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AREA FROM 1975 THROUGH 1981 -13-12 /----- I -14 V"'"/'~./'\..../"~--, \ BASIN ~ BOUNDARY~ '\ \ \o 10 20 30mi.---~o 10 20 30 40km. LEGEND 1.SUSPECTED STEPHAN LAKE DEN -1976. 2.BRUSHKANA DEN·1975 3.DEADMAN DEN •1975. 4.WATANA RENDEZVOUS SITE·1980. 5.WATANA DEN·1980. 6.JAY CREEK DEN -1978. 7.CLEARWATER DEN -1976. 8.KEG CREEK DEN -1975,1976, 1977. 9.SUSITNA RENDEZVOUS SITE •1980. 10.SUSITNA RENDEZVOUS SITE·1980. 11.SUSITNA DEN -1979,1980. 12.TOLSONA DEN·1980,1981, MENDELTNA RENDEZVOUS SITE·1977. 13.TOLSONA RENDEZVOUS SITE·1980. MENDELTNA DEN -1917. 14.MENDEL TNA RENDEZVOUS SITE -1976. 15.MENDEL TNA RENDEZVOUS SITE·1977. 16.TYONE CREEK DEN •1979. o PREPARED BY lES I ADF&G FIGURE ~Jl4 1 -1 ]1 )))1 )1 J 1 ~ ~ c FIGURE W15· OBSERVED HOME RANGES OF WOLVERINES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN BASED ON LOCATION OF RADIO-COLLARED ANIMALS (FROM GARDNER AND BALLARD.1982) LEGEND MALE HOME RANGES a FEMALE HOME RANGES c:J? o 10 20 MILES I I IIII.1o102030 KILOMETERS ~ ~ ~ ..... """ ..... -- - ..... ... .... ~0_ 8 ~ ~() "ro 7C %1'0 "" II A - 1 A -10 ...,><41=A-7 ~A-6 0)·O~ OM-~ OM-2 OM-3 OM -4 ~o... '":iI c;: -4 o~~'05) ----...,l-~-A -4o CIJ [i ~.:J:> OM -11 OM -12 OM-13 OM-14 .::JJ ~ 0t!?'t? '3$ °11.1'36 ~KOSir)O.Ck.. r'<&n •. o~):om ~ ...-{::JlJ.l e"'" ()'"::::ro0;ALASKAo---------r-CD ---CANADA o .....o s::: ro '" o o z; 0" :3rorou; );-» Zo »m ::Il »r -; O~ O:r:Z-;m(J) -;°mmAO"T'l""'C-; ..4J 0 (J) »Z."Z-;O O(J)::Il s:."."-OcZ::IlIl A .(D-(J)m 0(;')> S:Z::Il-(J)m 0::Il.(J)." --' 0'> ::IE: "'T1.- G)c: ;;0rn ":Ilm "» :Ilmo CD-< -im Cfl Cz <:m :Il Cfl =i-< o,., »r» Cfl "» 1 J ]]J J J 1 J 1 1 I -1 )1 (fROM GIBSON.t QI.1982). ,?fl.~'# i\O~fl.\.-.~\\l-\.-\~fl.,#-$\\0"\,,/'$~\'.(\f'C .,,/ ,,/'''/ ,,/ .,,/ ALASKA @ Pri mary Site •Secondary Site o Primary AIf~rnate Site •Tertiary Site 6 Shelter Site 1490W LOCATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF FOX DENS \ 0:(\0:( FAIRBANKS ~\~ o "t,~ f--i'....-J.o:(~g q:\u ANCHORAGE.....\"- FIGURE W17 j J 1 I 1 -1 1 --;]J 1 1 SIl,II". L."30 "'\ L."" S-'1·/ ..._.......".~l~~'\ ~ ./" ./ .J ./ ,.J V7'.."~MACLA~1iN RIVER ITYONE RIVER L~~../1 o LOCATIONS OF LAKES AND LAKE GROUPS SURVEYED FOR WATERFOWL IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN.TWO TO EIGHT LAKES WERE SURVEYED IN EACH HATCHED AREA FIGURE ~Jl8 m ,..- 3: 75 L.LJ ~ I-S~otlie.Oesper Creek :::l "..15,16,17,''3 01 20 c.!:I....... F"'"LJ... 70-______y _____J-----y------- ----M!o':'i.;k;~;e=~---___.A.- - --- 30-Midway lake en lJ.I Q 0 a:I CI:we 131 lJ.I 25 -I- <C:: U u. F (.) lJ.I 20-0..we 107 Murder lake In we 106 Stephan lake U. 0 enw ::l -we 145 Clarence lake-I 15- et>. W we 059 Fog lakesU Z WS 14S Watana Lake <C I-WB lOSa:10-0 0. :::ii- WS·130 Deadman lake WS069 we 135 _WS064 -067 Pistol Lake GfCtUP ~5-WB134 Delusion"t:~e~n~·r~~:--W8104 I-we 103 WB 129 8ig Lake-.WS 06rrWB035f-WS 038 Fog Lakes we 037 0 ~- RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF 20 WATERBODIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN COMPARED TO THREE WATERBODIES IN THE UPPER TANANA RIVER -SCOTTIE CREEK AREA 35 ....----------.....----------, ,....30 ~Ihed•••Bh.Il I..... QLlarU Lake ......Sh.w C,_k Fl ..l.Moo"L ..k.&.Vcinit~• (I) W 2S-c 0 ttlc: W...WB 107-Murd.t L~k.<:: 20(.)Ory Lake....U. (.) W ~ (I)Dot L •••-Sam Crkwe,a U. 0 15 (I) w ~~ -l <>WB O1l7-Plslol L .... W-(.)B••t Chie,C,••k Z 10 <...WB106-$I.ph.ft La"e a:-0 Robe:t'tson R-iw.t WB 14S-clarenca L.a •• ~ :::i Jon nson Sloug" S WB 133-WB065 o-dm...L.k.-WB 130 WS103 WBOS9 WBOSO WB 135 WB132 WS10S---8 14S:-Watan.L.ak. WB064 W8038 . WS13 WB 139 WS 104 WBll~ WB03 \l{S037 WB 115 WB066 WB 023 W8 025-HIOJI'I L .... W8150 8138 WB 015 B 137 a WBO,S_w ".,c: - IMPORTANCE INDICES OF WATERBODIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND THE UPPER TANANA RIVER BASIN - ]!1 1 ,1 1 i J ]I J i j ]) MIXED & HERBACEOUS-DEC'DUOUSFOREST-ow A RF &.LOW S H RUB CO N I FER 0 U S FORE S T .T A I..L S H RU 8 I II Ii I I I I'• .......SOG I BIACH-....COTTON-....TALL "'"TALL, ....".• S PAUCE ..,WOOD .."ALCER""GRASS1 I I 3343334443311 3409651231232 •ICQ • ::::l •I.Ia::-•aiii~:SEDGE-GRASS/:SE DGE·GRASS I LOW aIi8 OPEN WOODLAND •<.SPRUCE SPRUCE ISHAUB TUNDRA.WILLOW SHRUB Iffi~ ••lJ:2. TRAPlINE 2 B 7 2 2 1 6 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 5 1 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 :2 4 4 4 9 SIT E NO.4 0 9 5 S 1 0 3 2 6 7 4 4 5 6 7 6 7 9 8 7 8 9 ~ > l- e:: et ..J-:i en w· > l- et ..J We:: 100 .~U 1 I • --~..~-,......,.. '-r-....-....-........ '-~ I o CLUSTERING OF 42 SMALL MAMMAL TRAPLINE SITES INTO SIMILAR VEGETATIVE GROUPINGS)BASED ON AN ANALYSIS OF FREQUENCY COUNTS OF 81 PLANT TAXA IN THE GROUND COVER (FROM KESSEL.,al.19821.FIGURE W21 I I I J )J 1 •)i J ~l 1 1 1 MASKED SHREW I·70 -MEADOW VOLE eo '1 :I "so I \..•~D 40 I.I.40-' • • i •••30 •I I 30 20'•• \I·20-• I ••••••••~..• II)-•••.1.• • I •10 -• •I •••.-• t el ••••-I •• TUNDRA VOLE10- 60 ,n ~~,u j ·111 lL :mo ~2{J ARCTIC SHREW I I I I I •I I • •I...••...I··••.•.•• I I I I I I I I I I Ie·• • •*.•• 70 60 50 40 'JO ~20 "••••• • ••• I I I I I· I I I • I •• • • •••• (()-DUSKY SHREW SINGING VOLE "w~50' :}dQ U '0 w ~;.'1)......... I I I I I I I I I •••••I·•••••••• fiO,n ~50' j 40 "'-Juo ~:iO • •••• NORTHERN RED-BACKED VOLE I • I I.I I I I • I .- I •••I • • I ~ ••• I • I ••• • • I •••I •• • • •I·•:•••• HERBAClOUS I:I GOI'JIFlROU~:'I _MI'l (J _~DWARF•LOW "HRUB]:FOREST :"H:'~~':'~:,:,:::;f"- ",Ii'\,[",•.,.~lDGt(.fM:'5clN.':',"I uPI"---..'""Jr"','."I flllU"UA,',M.1 'Au r':'d <"-""Ill',','''''''(m I 0\',~NHI!l>~.:"Pf-hKt -"J-'Kuq ---.I ".'fiur L of !'<t~lA"'"AII)1 ".""•.,., ~JII I ",I BROWN LEMMING .~, I 50 I 40 I I OG I 21)-I I 10 I.-..,.••eI ••• MIXfll,.... LJ~CIUUOlJs_f-om ~;r ~ tALI SHrUIH GONIf-F-HOli", rOH(;,T I ~>;:~;~~r.{-t ~~~I~,~LtW ~liu"I~:~;:L;;:r •e~~,:':~~~:~~H'~~I;S ~a I I T;I I HEflBACEOUS DWARF /I,lUW SHRUB • 70 "'~~() ~40 Vo JO o 20 Z ;0 ABUNDANCE PATTERNS OF EIGHT SMALL MAMMAL SPECIES RELATIVE TO VEGETATION TYPES AT 42 SITES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN,ALASKA 29 JULY -30 AUGUST 1981 PREPARED BY TES I UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FIGURE W22 1 ]1 1-1 j C 1 ]I i MOOSE POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS AVAILABILITY OF FOOD MOOSE PREDATI ON BY OTH ER PREDATORS MOOSE HARVEST BY MAN ACCESS AND HUNTER EFFORT A LTERATIONS OF ACCESS DENSITY OF COMPETITORS (IN CL UDING OTHER MOOSE) ALTERATIONS 0 F HABITAT (I.E.INUNDATION VIA IMPOUNDMENT) ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AFFECTING POPULATION FACTORS DETERMINANT PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING MOOSE POPULATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTIONS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THESE POPULATIONS FIGURE W23 -J I 1 ]I ---J J -1 -J J ')1 1 1 Ii BROWN BEAR POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS AVAILABILITY OF FOOD (VEGETATION AND MEAT)BROWN BEAR HARVEST BY MAN ALTERATIONS OF AVAILABLE VEGETATION (I.E .INUNDATION VI A 1M POUNDMENT) ACCESS AND HUNTER EFFORT ALTERATIONS OF ACCESS POPULATION DENSITY OF OTHER PREY SPECIES ALTERATIONS IN MOOSE ABUNDANCE DENSITY OF BERRIES AND OTHER EDIBLE PLANTS ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AFFECTING POPULATION FACTORS DETERMINANT PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING BROWN BEAR POPULATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTIONS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THESE POPULATIONS FIGURE W24 ~I 1 1 i )J )J .E ]n 1 J BLACK BEAR POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS AVAILABILITY OF FOOD (VEGETATION AND MEAT) AVAILABILITY OF FOREST AND DEN SITES BLACK BEAR HARVEST BY MAN DENSITY OF BERRIES AND OTHER EDIBLE PLANTS ACCESS AND HUNTER EFFORT DENSITY OF BEA RS AND AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE FOREST FACTORS DETERMINANT ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AF"FEClING POPULAllON ALTERATIONS 0 F HABITAT (I.E.INUNDATION VIA IMPOUND~ENT)ALTERATIONS OF ACCESS PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING BLACK BEAR POPULATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTION~THAT MIGHT AFFECT THESE;POPULATIONS FIGURE W25 -j -1 1 J 1 " J J J WOLF I I ))1 J POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS AVAILABILITY OF FOOD WOLF HARVEST BY MAN DENSITY OF CARIBOUFACTORS DETERMINANT ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AFFECTING POPULATION DEN~TY OF MOOSE ALTERATIONS OF HABITAT (I.E.INUNDATION VIA 1M POUNDMENT )LOCATION OF WINTER BEDS ACCESS AND FUR PR ICE ALTERATIONS OF ACCESS PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING WOLF POPULATION~IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTIONS TtiAT MIGHT AFFECT T~ESE POPULATIONS FIGURE W26 1 1 i --j---)]J 1 J 1 1 1 )] BEAVER POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS AVAILABILITY OF FOOD AVAILABILITY OF SUITABLE HABITAT BEAVER HARVEST BY MAN ACCESS AND FUR PRICE ALTERATIONS OF ACCESS DENSITY OF COMPETITORS (INCLUDING OTHER BEAVERS) ALTERATIONS OF VELOCITY AND VOLUME OF WATER DENSITY OF VEGETATION ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AFFECTING POPULATIONS FACTOR DETERMINANT PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING BEAVER POPULATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTIONS THAT MIGHT AfFECT THESE POPULATIONS FIGURE W27 J J ]1 j _J 1 MARTEN J J ])]I 1 POPULATION REGULATING FACTORS FACTORS DETERMINANT AVAILABILITY OF FOOD DENSITY OF MICROTINE RODENTS MARTEN HARVEST BY MAN ACCESS AND FUR VALUE ACTIONS CONCEIVABLY AFFECTING POPULATION ALTERATIONS OF HABITAT (I.E.CHANGE IN SUCCESSIONAL STAGE OR IN UNDATION VIA IMPOUNDMENT) ALTERATIONS OF ACCESS PROBABLE FACTORS REGULATING MARTEN P9PULATIONS IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN AND ACTIONS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THESE POPULATIONS FIGURE W28 1 -1 J 1 J 1 1 1 i 3900 2500 2300 ..-.f 2100 = c 0 .;:/900 0> Ql IJJ 1700 /500 GOLDEN ~:~rE GYR-GOS- EAGLE FALCON HAWK RAVEN GE-IO·· ~I GE'7"· BE-8 1?E-5GE-' rlH MAXIMUM FLOOD LEVEL-2202 fI- ..",~9~~;4!-,,~!\~I,Io!I:'~.,9f.~~~r!l1~,~~,,,:~~....,~I.B.5.t,I.~\,',... BE-I GYR-l..........' 8E-2 :..':"-:':"':"':'.......-fl"---------------------------- _'i~!!!.~~~~~e!!~~WNLEVEL-2095 fI-':::>'....----I"~'-------------!-R-ll,A-O -R-12 R'''~R-e " 8E-3 -OE -4 fR-1I -OE-5 BE-4[OE -~R-7 !GE-a,Gf-! GOS-I fR-, BE-ll fR-g,R-IO PRESENT WATER LEVEL AT DAM SITE.. 1190 946 783 702 1Tl. m<c...o' ::) 641 :i' :s: lD... lD ~80 iil 019 458 1987 n 1991 1992 1993 Neating locotlon not within Wotono impoundm.nt ELEVATIONS OF RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE WATANA IMPOUNDMENT AREA'IN RELATION TO FI LUNG AND OPERATION WATER LEVELS FIGURE W29 1 1 1 1 i -))J 1 1 1 1 2000 1800 +-1600 CD If c 1400 c::o '0 1200 > CD lJJ 1000 800 600 GOLDEN BALD GYRFALCON GOSHAWK RAVENEAGLEEAGLE 1GE~17 ~YR-3* YR-2 lBE-7-}~-14 GE~15 -G05-3 R-13 R-15 ( Maximum Flood Level- GE~II 1485 ft. }GE-16 Norma'Maximum \ .,....jj:~~::~'.....................'to ..............-•••--•••:-:"-.I~.........~~~r.~t!~g.•~~\I.e~~I~~~..•. 1--1----------=ai5S-=2--R-16,R-17 '"-,------.- -1---lf3E=~-1-----------------R-IS,R-21*N~r-;;alMinimum---7"- DrClwdown LeveH400 ft. -R-20 -GE-18* -Present Water level at Dam Site 1-.-'-'---._.---,-0_0--_._.1--'---'-f-'-'-~'-'-'- -BE~8" - It Nesting location not within Devil Canyon impoundment 610 549 488 fTI <D<~27 Q--.o ::::J 366 5' 3: CD 305 n:- Ul 244 183 CHANGES IN ELEVATION OF THE DEVIL CANYON RESERVOIR DURING OPERATION AND ELEVATIONS OF RAPTOR AND RAVEN NESTS IN THE PROXIMITY OF THE 1M POUNDMENT ZON E FIGURE W30 ..... ""'" APPENDICES EA TO ED SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Environmental Guidelines for Facility Siting,Design Construction,Operation,and Rehabil itation. A -ALL FACILITIES 1.A SOO-foot maximum width buffer of undisturbed vegetation should be maintained between a facil ity and any stream,1 ake or wetl and. 2.Siting should minimize requirements for clearing removal of vegeta- tion. 3.Where removal of vegetation is required,organic overburden should be segregated and stockpil ed for use in subsequent rehabil itation. Stockpiles should be placed in well-drained locations and bermed to contain runoff.Depleted or nonoperational borrow pits should be used as overburden storage areas where feasible. 4.Structures should be consol idated to disturb the minimum necessary area of ground surface. 5.Design should minimize gravel requirements by avoidance of wet areas or permafrost zones,structures consol idation,and bal anced cut and fill. 6.Where gravel pads must be used,adequate provision for cross- drainage shoul d be made to avoid impoundment of sheet flow. - 7.A minimum distance of 1/2 mile should be maintained between any facility and the following: -Salmon spawning area; -Bal~eagle nest; -Go ld en eag 1e nest; -Brown bear den; -Wo 1f den; -Oall sheep 1 ambing area;and -Min er all ick. 8.Bl asting should avoid times and locations which are sensitive to fish and wildlife.These times and locations should be determined on a case-by-case basis by the environmental consultant and in accord ancewith resource agency g ui del ines.Proper sizing and sequencing of blasting charges can minimize fish and wildlife impacts.Streamsi.de excavation should not be done by blasting. Bl asting procedures and schedules must be sufficiently flexible to allow alteration at short notice for the protection of wildlife. Alaska Department of Fish and Game blasting guidelines should be fo 11 owed. 9.Excavation spoil should be disposed of in the future impoundment area of the dam under construction •.Where haul distances prohibit this,spoil should be used in the rehab-ilitation of depleted or nonoperational material sites,or for solid waste disposal site maintenance.Spoil retained for these applications should be stockpiled in stable,well-drained locations,and bermed to contain runoff. 10.Solid waste disposal sites should be established in stable,well- drained locations.Siting should utilize existing excavations such as depleted upland borrow pits.Intermittent drainages,ice-rich soils,or other -erosion-susceptible features should be avoided. Deposited material should be covered daily with nonsilty excavation spoil stockpiled for this purpose at the site.Solid waste dis- posal site design and operation should conform with guidelines established by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conserva- t ion. 11.Facility siting should avoid thaw susceptible areas (discontinuous permafrost zones)capable of slumping or thermal erosion. 12.Where hydraulic erosion is unavoidable,appropriate measures (rang- ing from filtration fabric to settling ponds)should be employed to minimize siltation. 13.Erosion-prone slopes should be ferti 1 ized and dry seeded with a fast-growing native grass. 14.Equipment,structures and materials should be removed from a site prior to rehabilitation.The site should be graded to contours which are consistent with surrounding terrain and allow complete drainage with minimal erosion potential. 15.Where it can be demonstrated that erosion is not likely to be a problem,restoration should emphasize fertilization and scarifica- tion and minimize seeding,to encourage the invasion of native plants from the surrounding parent population.Where seeding is emp 1oyed,nat i ve grasses appropri ate to the climate and geography of the project area should be used. 16.A systematic program to avoid or mitigate project activity-related impacts should be developed during Phase II.At a minimum,this program should include the following components: - A Petroleum and Hazardous Substance Plan which sets forth de- tailed specifications for training of personnel and for proced- ures and equipment to ensure the safe storage,handling,trans- poration,collection-,and disposal of petroleum products and hazardous substances.This program should include the prepara- tion of a Petroleum and Hazardous Substances Manual to be used by all project personnel.Special attention should be given to the design of this manual so that size,format,and contents facili- tate routine on-the-job use. - - - •fIl!!ftIll'!, - .... -An Environmental Briefings Program to familiarize project per- sonnel with environmentally sensitive features of the project area,federal and state regulations,agency permit stipul ations, and specific project policies and restrictions regarding protec- tion of vegetation,fish,wildlife,and cultural resources.The Environmental·Briefings Program should be combined with the project Safety Program and involve continuing updates and reviews through regularly scheduled weekly meetings.The Envi- ronmental Briefings Program should be positive and informative in nature and use visual aids to stimulate interest.The pro- gram shou 1d stri ve toexp 1ai n why a certai n feature or organ ism is vulnerable to disturbance,and therefore why protective meas- ures are needed in each case .. 17.Storage containers for fuels and hazardous substances should be located at least 1500 feet from water bodi es and bermed to cont ai n 110 percent of the maximum volume to be stored.Containment ar~as should be lined with impervious material. 18.Project construction and operation activities should be planned and scheduled to avoid or minimize disturbance to fish streams. Where activities affecting fish streams cannot be avoided (e.g., construction of stream crossings),activities should be scheduled for periods when fish are not present.Where stream crossings are planned for winter construction,the thalweg,banks,and other locational features should be identified and staked in the field prior to snowfall or freeze-up. B -CONSTRUCTION CAMPS - - 1.To minimize scavenging by birds and mammals,with resultant ad- verse contacts between people and animals,all putrescible kitchen waste should be stared indoors in sealed containers and inciner- ated on the same day they are produced. 3..... 2.Camp incinerators should be properly sized and operated by trained personnel to ensure that 'all putrescible wastes are completely burned to mineral ash.Incinerator capacity should be carefully specified to accommodate peak camp occupancy. Camp perimeters should be protected with animal-resistant fencing designed and built to specifications provided by the environmental consultant. 4.The liquid waste treatment system should be operated by state of AI aska ace red ited personnel.Grey water must be treated along with other liquid wastes.A regular effluent sampling and testing program should be followed to ensure compliance with NPDES and state of Al aska Wastewater Disposal Standards (18 AAC 72).Efflu- ent test i ng shou 1d be conducted by a state of Al aska cert i fied water quality laboratory.Effluent discharge to streams should be located to achieve maximum dilution. 5.Wells should be established for potable water withdrawal.If wells are not feasible at a given location,water should be with- drawn from lakes.Streams should be considered only as a last resort,and on ly after a determi nat i on is made on a case-by-case basis that fish or wildlife will not be adversely affected by water withdrawal,particularly during overwintering and reproduc- tive periods.Intake structures should be designed to preclude entrapment or entrainment of fish eggs or larvae. C -ACCESS ROADS 1.Road design speeds should be kept to the minimum consistent with project requirements and should not exceed 40 miles per hour. Lower design speeds allow greater flexibility for alignment adjust- ments to avoid environmentally sensitive features and reduce requirements for major road cuts.Lower design speeds also enable routing to follow higher,drier terrain,thereby reducing require- ments for gravel extraction and fill placement in wetlands.A 40-mile-per-hour design speed will increase road safety and enhance recreational resource potential. 2.Road profi le elevations should be minimized and side slopes made sufficiently gentle to allow free passage of big game. 3.Routes should avoid wetland and riparian areas,and minimize stream crossings and encroachments. 4.Road design should keep gravel extraction requirements to a minimum by avoiding wet areas and emphasizing balanced cut and fill. ~i 5.Where stream crossings cannot be avoided, right angles to the stream and located to bank cutting and streambed disturbance. wintering areas within streams should be ments. they should be aligned at minimize requirements for Fi sh spawni ng and over- avoi ded by route adjust-- 6.Bridges should be installed in preference to culverts or low-water crossings (fords).Bridge supports should be located outside active channels. 7.Culverts should be properly sized to accommodate all species and age groups of fish utilizing that portion of the stream (see Alaska Department of Fish and Game stream crossing guidelines). 8.Culverts should be placed to conform with the slope of the undis- turbed streambed at the place of installation and should not be perched. 9.Low-water crossings should be used only where a stream will sustain infrequent,1i ght traffi c.Such cross i ngs shou 1d conform to the slope of the undi sturbed streambed and shoul d be constructed of materials that will preclude water percolating through rather than over them. - - - ~ i, r-, 10.Where stream crossings are pla.nned for winter construction,the thalweg,banks,and other locational features should be identified and staked in the field prior to snowfall or freeze-up.Over- wintering areas of fish or aquatic mammals must not be disturbed during winter construction. 11.All access roads not required for project operation or recrea- tional purposes,should be II pu t to bed"as soon as they are no longer required,if possible during the same season.Drainage structures should be removed and the roadbed recontoured to a stable configuration providing proper drainage.Rehabilitation should include 'scarification,fertilization,and blockage with a berm followed by a cut.Erosion-prone locations should be seeded with fast-growing native grasses.Where impoundment of sheet flow has occurred,nonoperational roads should be structurally altered to restore normal flow. 12.Road dust control should utilize water rather than oil or other synthetic compounds.Water withdrawal procedures and sources for dust control should be approved on a case-by-case basis by envi- ronmental personnel following site-specific inspection. 13.Grading or other road maintenance activities should not push material into streams.Culverts should be checked periodically and kept free of ice and debris to avoid blocking flows.Special attention to culverts is required immediately prior to,during, and following spring break-up. o -MATERIAL SITES 1.A detailed,site-specific mlnlng plan should be prepared for each borrow operation.Design should be an interdisciplinary team effort involving civil engineers and environmental specialists ex- perienced in design,construction,and permit requirements.Mining plans should include all roads,facilities,mining techniques, schedules,and rehabilitation procedures. 2.Borrow areas required for dam and ancillary facility construction should be sited in the future impoundment area of the dam under construction. 3.Sit i ng of borrow areas outs i de the impoundment zone shou 1d place first priority on well-drained upland locations.Second priority consideration should be given to first-level terrace sites.Active floodplain and streambed sites should be avoided unless they are within the impoundment area of the dam under construction.Stock- piling within active floodplains should be prohibited.Floodplain gravel mining should follow the guidelines set forth in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service IIGravel Removal Guidelines Manual for Arctic and Subarctic Floodplains,1I 1980. 4.All material sites should be developed in phases by aliquots.The phases should be prioritized to save until last those portions of the site which are more sensitive from an environmental standpoint. 5.First-level terrace sites outside the impoundment zone should be located on the inactive side of the floodplain and mined by pit excavation rather than by shallow scraping.Excavations should be separated from the active floodplain by a SOO-foot buffer of undis- turbed,vegetated terrai n. 6.If wet processing is required,water withdrawal and discharge loca- tions should be carefully sited to minimize fish and wildlife dis- turbance.Drawdown in overwintering pools used by fish or aquatic mammals and any disturbance to spawning areas must be avoi.ded. Water intake structures should be designed to preclude entrapment or entrainment of fish eggs or larvae.Gravel washing should employ recycled water.If pit dewatering is required because of ponding or wet processing,settling ponds should be designed,oper- ated,and monitored to ensure that NPDES standards for di scharge are achieved.Settling ponds should be designed and sited to avoid fi sh entrapment.Water di scharge shoul d be di rected ina manner that will minimize erosion.Energy dissipators should be used where necessary. 7.Abandoned access roads,camp pads,and airstrips should be used wherever feasible as material sources for operations in lieu of ex- panding existing sites or initiating new ones.Where riprap is re- quired,material produced during excavation of the powerhouse,gal- leries,and tunnels should be used if feasible. 8.Material site design features should facilitate restoration.Sites should have irregular boundaries,including projections of undis- turbed,vegetated terrain into the site.Slopes should incorporate a diversity of contours created during actual excavation,rather than during restoration. 9.Where ponding will occur,as in first-level terrace sites,irregu- 1 ar boundaries and slope contours should be accentuated.Isl ands of undisturbed vegetated terrain should be left within the per- imeter of the operational site. 10.Organic overburden,slash,and debris stockpiled during clearing should be distributed over the excavated area prior to fertiliza- tion.This includes sites which have ponded. 11.Once operational material sites are depleted or no longer required, they shoul d be rehabi 1itated by the end of the next growi ng season following last use. - - -, .... E -TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS 1.Where they are not adjacent to an existing road,transmission cor- ridors should be constructed by helicopter support to avoid neces- sary clearing of vegetation.In tundra locations where clearing is not required for access,winter construction on a snow base may be an acceptable substitute for helicopter-supported construction, provided Rolligon or flat-tread,Nodwell-type vehicles are used. Transmission corridor development should avoid creating an alter- nate access route for all-terrain vehicles. 2.Transmission line additions should be made adjacent to established transmission corridors.Where transmission lines have a common destination,they should follow a common route. 3.Transmission towers should not be placed in active floodplains and should avoid streams and lakes by a minimum 500 feet. 4.Herbicides should not oe used for vegetation control along trans- missfon corridors. 5.Transmission corridors should follow the forest edge (i.e.,the transition zone between forest and shrub or forest and tundra)and avoid crossing wetlands . APPENDIX EE:SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF MAMMAL SPECIES FOUND IN 'THE PROJECT AREA - Common Name Scientific Name MJose Caribou Dall Sheep Brown Bear Black Bear Wolf Wolverine Belukha Whale Beaver r~uskrat River otter Mink Marten Red Fox Lynx Coyote Short-Tailed Weasel Least Weasel Masked Shrew Dusky Shrew Arctic Shrew Pygmy Shrew Collared Pika Snoweshoe Hare Hoary Marmot Arctic Ground Squirrel Red Squirrel Northern Red-Backed Vole Meadow Vole Tundra Vole Singing Vole Brown Lemming Northern Bog Lemming Porcupine ~~ Rangifer tarandus Ovis dalli Ursus arctos Ursusamericanus Canis lUpus ~9ulo Delphinapterus leucas Castor canadensis--- Gndatra zibethica Lutra canadensis Mustela ~ Martes americana VUlpes ~ Lynx canadensis Canis latrans Mustela ermine a Mustela nivalis Sorex cinereus ~monticolus Sorex arcticus ~hoyi Gchotona collaris Lepus americanus Marmota caligata Spermophilus parryii Tamiasciurus hudsonicus Clethrionomys rutilus Microtus pennsylvanicus Microtus oeconomus Microtus ~ Lemmus sibiricus Sxnaptomys borealis Erethizon dorsatum - - - - .""". - - .-' ..... APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Based on Kessel et ai,1982) APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Cont'd) (Based on Kasse I et at,1982) - ~ Main Relafive2HabitatsAbundance lakes U-sp lakes C-sp,F lakes FC-S ~ lakes,rivers FC-sp,F,U-S lakes,rivers lakes U-sp,FC-F -lakes FC-sp,S·U-f, rivers ~; lakes FC . lakes Species Canvasback Aythya val isineria Greater scaup Aythya marl I a Lesser scaup Aythya affinis Comrro n go I de neye 8ucephala clanguJa Barrow's goldeneye 8ucepha"la islandlca Bufflehead Bucephala albeofa Oldsquaw Clangula hyemalis Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus White-winged sooter Melanitta deglandi Surf sooter Melanitta persplcillata B I a ck sooter Melanitta ~ Common merganser Mergus merganser Red-breasted merganser Mergus serrator Goshawk Accipiter genti I is S harp-s hi nned hawk Accl piter striatus Red-ta i I ed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos Bal d eaa IeHallaeeTus leuoocephalus Mars h hawk Circus cyaneus Osprey Pandion hal iaetus Status' T B B B B T B B T B B B B B 81 ·B 8 B B? T lakes lakes,rivers U lakes,rivers U deciduous and U mixed forest con i ferous and U mixed forest con i ferous and U mixed forest cl iffs Fe '., forests,cl i ffs U meadows FC-sp,F·U-S, lakes R-sp ..~~ - APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1962) ------------------------'---- APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUS1TNA BASIN (Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982) Species Status 1 Main Habitats Relative2Abundance Sol itary sandpiper Trlnga solitario Greater ye II ow legs Tringa malanoleuca Lesser yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Pine grosbeak Pinicola enucleator B'1 B'1 T,S T,S (B'1) scattered wood-U I and,forest edge near lakes wet,meadows,U lakes and river soorel i nes lake and river FC-sp;R-S stDrel (nes open con I ferous forest - - cliffs,block U fields Gray-crowned rosy finch Leucostictetephrocotls Common red po I I Cardue lis f I ammea Pine siskin Carduel Is pinus B'1 B,W B? low shrubs, open wood I and mixed forest, tall shrubs A u - White-winged crossbill ~leucoptera Savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwlchensis S,81 B coniferous FC forest low shrubs A wit h gram i no Id ground cover low and C med i um shrubs open and C cI osed forest medium and tall FC shrubs with forest ov~rstory low and medium U shrubs near water Dark-eyed junco ~hyemal is Tree sparrow Spilella arborea Whits-crowned sparrow Zonotrlchia leucophrys Gol den-crowned sparrow Zonotrichla atricapilia Fox sparrow Passerella il iaca Lincoln's sparrow Melospize IIncolnii B B B B1 B1 B1 low shrubs low shrubs, dwarf spruce A U - Lapland longspur Calcarious lapponlcus Smit h'S longspur Calcarius pictus Snow bunti ng Plectrophenax nivalls B B'1 B'1 dwarf shrub,A meadow and mat dwarf shrub,U meadow and mat high elevation FC cI i ffs and block f iel ds - APPENDIX EF STATUS,HAB lTAT USE AND RELATI VE JlBUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUS1TNA BASIN (Contld) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982) Species Wt'eatear Oenanthe oenanthe Tow nse nd IS sol ita ire Myadestes townsend! Arct i c warb ler Phylloscopus boreal Is Status 1 B B B Main Habitats block fields cliffs scattered forest, medium shrubl and Relative2Abundance U U_ FC Golden-crowned kinglet Regulussatrapa Ruby-crowned kinglet Regulus calendula Water pipit Anthus spinoletta Bohemian waxw I ng Borribyci II ag~rru Ius Nort rern shr I ke Laniusexcubitor T B B 87 B coniferous and U mixed forest con i ferous C forests dwarf shrub C mat,block fie Id scattered CTsp,F,U-S forest scattered U forest,ta I I shrubs scattered U forest,mad [urn and tall shrubland - Orange-crowned warbler Vermivora cel ata Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia B T,57 riparian willows R Yellow-rumped warbler Dendrolca coronata 81ackpoll warbler Dendroica striata Nortrern waterthrush Seiurus noveboracensis Wilson's warbler Wllsonlapusilla Rusty bl ackbi rd Euphaqus carol inus Wandering tattler Heterosce I us i ncanus B B B7 B T,S7 (B7) (B7),T T forest C tal I shrubs,FC forest tall shrubs FC near water med i urn shrubs C wit h or wit hout forest overstory open coniferous U forest,ta 1I shrubs tund ra streams U alluvial bar R APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRO SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Contld) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982) Species Status 1 Main Habitats Relative2Abundance Pectoral sandpiper Cal ldrls melanotos Baird's sandpiper Ca lid r Isba i rd i i Least sandpiper Cal idris minutilla Semipalmated sandpiper Cal idrls pusilla Sander I r ng Calldris alba Northarn phalarope Lob I pes lobatus Long-billed dowitcher L imnoaromus seclopaceus T B B1 T,S T B7 T wet meadows,U pond,I ake edges dwarf shrub U mat wet and dwarf FC shrub rreadow lake and river U-sp,R-S s oores and bars I ake and r rver R-F s teres and bars wet meadows FC with ponds lake and rIver U-sp soores and bars dwarf shrub FC mat and rreadow Long-tailed jaeger Sterecrarius longicaudus Herri ng gull Larus argentatus B1 T,S lakes,rivers U -Mew gull Larus canus Bonaparte IS gu I I Larus philadelphia Arctic tern Sterna paradlsea Great oorned owl Bubo virglnianus B,S B,S B B1,W lakes,rivers C lakes,rivers,U scattered spruce woodland I akes and FC lakes Inres open and U closed foresT - Hawk owl Surnia ulula S oort-eared owl Asio flammeus Boreal owl Aegol Ius funereus Belted kingfisher Megacery Ie a Icyon Common fl i cker Co I aptas au ratus T? B7,W T,S,(B7) B?W B? B tundra mixed forest open hab itat mixed forest cutbanks, rivers forest edge R u U R U U - - .- APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et ai,1982) ....Species Hairy woodpecker Picoides vi Ilosus Status' B,W Mal n Habitats deciduous and mixed forest Relative 2Abundance u Downy woodpecker P i co i des pubes cens B1,W open deciduous U and mixed forest r ...... B I ack-backedthree-toed woodpecker Picoides arcticus Nort herli three-toed woodpecker Picoides tridactylus Eastern kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus Say's pt-oebe Sayorn i s saya AI der flycatcher Empidonaxalnorum 01 ive-sided flycatcher Nuttallornis borealis B1,W B,W A B B1 B1 coniferous forest CDn i ferous forest open shrub land upland cliff medium and tall shrubs open and scattered forest R u u U U Western wood pewee Contopus sordidulus Horned lark Eremophila alpestris Violet-green swallow B1 B 81 deciduous R forest dwarf shrub C-sp,Fi FC-S mat,block. field riparian FC cliffs,rivers cutbanks,U rivers CDn i ferous and C mixed forest ...... Bank swallow Riparia riparia Tree swa I low I ridoprocne bi color CI iff swallow Petrochelldon pyrroonota Gray jay ,Perisoreus canadensis B 81 8 8,W rivers,lakes rivers,lakes FC U,L Black-bi I led magpie ~~ Common raven Corvus corax S,(81)W 8,W open tall U s hru bs,s catte red forest ri pari an and C up I and cl Iffs :..... Black-capped chi ckadee ~atri cap!II us 8,W deciduous forest U III APPENDIX EF STATUS,HABITAT USE AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES IN THE UPPER SUSITNA BASIN (Cont'd) (Based on Kessel et at,1982) ""'"I Species Boreal chickadee Parus hudsonicus Brown creeper Certhia familiaris Status 1 B,W B MaIn Habitats con i ferous and mixed forest deciduous and mixed forest Rei atlve Abundance 2 Fe U Dipper Cinclus mexicanus Amer i can rob j n Turdus migratod us Varied thrush Ixoreus naevius Hermit thrush Catharus guttata Swainson's thrush Catharus ustulatus Gray-cheeked thrush Catharus minimus B?W B B B B B rivers,U streams forest,medium C-sp,S;U-F and tall shrub land forest,tall O-sp,S;U-F alder thickets strip forested C-sp,Fi U-F slopes,tall- al der th ickets forest FC scattered FC spruce,dwarf spruce,deciduous forest - 1 B breeding confirmed,B7 -probably breeds,(B7)=possibly breeds, T transient,W =winters,S=summers,A =accidental 2 A abundant,C=common,FC =fairly common,U =uncommon,R =rate, sp =srping,S '"summer,F =fall,L =local ~ I APPENDIX EG STATUS AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES ceSERVED ON THE LOWER SUSlTNA BASIN DURING GROUND SURVEYS CONDUCTED JUNE 10 TO JUNE 20,1982 r- No.of Status 1 Relative Individuals Species Abundance Observed,-. Arctic loon M 0 (2 seen in (PSi 2 May 1982) Red-throated I.oon M,6 (2 seen in..-May 1982) Red~necked grebe M 0 (5 seen in (R)2 May 1981) Doub Ie-crested cormorant Tundra swan M 0 (60 seen near mouth of river in May 1981 and 420 seen near mouth of river in May 1982) Brant M 0 (2 seen in May 1981 ) Greater white-M <50 (89 seen in fronted goose May 1981 and 51 seen in May 1982) Snow goose (101)1 Canada goose M,(PS)3 (1 seen in May 1981 and 26 seen in May 1982) Green~winged teal M,(PS)U Several 2 1 s and 3 1 s (42 seen in-May 1981) Mallard M,(PS)U 6 Northern pintai I M,(PS)U <6 American widgeon M,(PS)U Most numerous-surface feed i ng duck;seen in pa i rs along main river and sloughs almost every day· ~Greater scaup M 2 Harlequin duck 6 Surf scoter M 2 Common goldeneye M,S U 4 ",-Common merganser M,(PS)FC Small flocks of up to 10 seen along the main river; most numerous ducks seen in May and June Said eagle (M),S U 17 active nests seen in riparian cottonwood stands ~Sharp-shinned hawk (101),(PS)Several seen I Northern goshawk (R),(PS)Several seen Red-ta i led hawk (M),(PS)1 - APPENDIX EG STATUS AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES reSERVED ON THE LOWER SUSITNA BASIN DURING GROUND SURVEYS CONDUCTED JUNE 10 TO JUNE 20,1982 (Cont'd) Species Arner i can kestrel Merl in Sandh j II crane Semipalmated plover Greater yellowlegs So I i tary sand piper Spotted sand piper Whimbrel Common sn i pe Red-necked phalarope Parasitic jaeger Bonaparte,!s gu I I Mew gull Herring gUll Black-I egged kittiwake Arctic tern Status 1 ("'1),(PS) (M),(PS) M (M),S (M),PS (M),(PS) (M),S "'1 ("'1),(PS) (M),PS (M),PB (M),S (n (M),B Relative Abundance U U FC C FC FC FC C (R) Fe No.of I nd i v i d ua \s Observed 1 A few seen hunting along river Several heard at,a distance along main river (27 seen near mouth of river in May.1982) Nests in alluvium along the river Seen and heard forag i ng a r ong river Courtship rituals observed a long river 'Regularly seen;5 nests seen a long shores of main river,sloughs and feeder streams On I y 1 observed; assumed to be late northbound migrant Winnowing snipe were heard and/or seen along the river 2 3 Pa i rs a nd sma I I groups seen feeding along main river and sloughs 7 breeding colonies of 20 -100 pairs seen on aII uv iaI islands along river between Tal keetna and mouth of river 130;normal Iy a pelagic species; nearest breeding colony at Chisik Island in lower Cook Inlet Pairs and smal I groups - - - - ..... .- I APPENDIX EG STATUS AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE LOWER SUSITNA BASIN DURING GROUND SURVEYS CONDUCTED JUNE 10 TO JUNE 20,1982 (Cont'd) APPENDIX EG STATUS AND RELATIVE ASUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE LOWER SUSITNA BASIN DURING GROUND SURVEYS CONDUCTED JUNE 10 TO JUNE 20,1982 (Cont'd)- Status 1 Relative Species Abundance Swainson's thrush (M),(B)C Hermit thrush (M),P8 U American Robin (M),B FC Var i ed thrush (M),B FC Bohemian waxwing (r,,,U Northern shrike (M).(PS) Orange-crowned (M),(PS)FC warbler Yellow warbler (M),B FC Yellow-rumped (M),S C warbler Wilson's warbler ("I),PB FC Savannah sparrow (M),PB U Fox sparrow (M),B C Lincholn's sparrow (M),B FC Golden-crowned ("I),B U sparrow White-crowned (M),S C sparrow Blackpol I warbler NorThern waTer thrush Dark-eyed junco (M),B ("I),B (M),B C C FC No.of Individuals Observed Seen regularly (7th mosT numerous small landbird) Not recorded down- stream from Tal keeTna 2 nesTs observed Seen regularly (10th mosT common passerine Fewer than 12 seen 2 Seen regularly 1 nesT seenj tall shrubs 2nd most common passer i ne seen regularly in mixed forest, cottonwood and tal I shrubs 3rd mosT common passer i ne seen regularly in tal' ri par i an shrubs, cotTonwood and mixed forest MOST numerous passer i ne seen regularly in riparian cotton- wood and mixed cottonwood nest seen individual was heard just above Bell Island 9th most numerous passer i ne seen regularly in med i um to ta 1 I shrub th i ckeTs and cottonwood forests on sma I I islands APPENDIX EG STATUS AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE LOWER SUS I TNA BAS I N 0 URI NG GROUND SLR VEYS CONDUCTED JUNE 10 TO JUNE 20,1982 (Cont'd) Species Rusty b I ackb i rd Wh i te-w i nged crossb ill Common redpoll Pine s i ski n Status l (M),B (M) (M) (M) Relative Abundance u U FC U No.of Individuals Observed 2 48 A few were heard or seen in cottonwoods along river ..... 11 ncl udes information on migration from aerial surveys in May ,1981 and 1982. 2()indicates assessments of status or rei ative abundance other than those provided by the University of Alaska museum • G£-l GE-2 GE-3 GE-4 GE-5 GE-6 GE-7 GE-8 APPENDIX EH DESCR I PTI ON 2.4 km upriver from Vee Canyon and 0.5 to 0.6 km up a narrow canyon on the north side of the Susitna River.Three nests present;1980 nest 26 m up a 33 m cl iff,100 m back from and 67 m above unnamed creek,1981 nest 8 m up 12 m cl iff 81 m back from and 67 m above unnamed creek (Kessel,et al,1982, unpubl.data). 4.2 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Jay Creek and ina canyon all the north si de of the Susitna Ri ver.Three nests were present;1980 nest 5 m up 13 m cl iff,10 m back from and.18 m above unnamed creek,1981 nest 1 m up 5 m, vegetated cliff,14m back from and 33 m above unnamed creek (Kes se1,et a 1,1982,unpub 1.data). 2.4 km up Jay Creek from its confl uence with the Susitna Ri ver.Three nests were present;1981 nest 5 m up 30 m cl i ff ,150 m from west bank and 115 m above Jay Creek (Kessel,et al,1982,unpubl.data). 1.6 km up Kosina Creek from its confluence with the Susitna River and on the east side of Kosina Creek.This nest was identified as an inactive raven nest in 1981 but Golden Eagles nested there in 1982 (8.Cooper,pors.comm.1982). 1.0 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Kosina Creek. The nest is 32 m up 38 m cl iff on north riverbank (Kessel, et a 1,1982). 2.8 km down the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of Kos ina Creek on the north bank of the river.White (1979)reported a Golden Eagle nest at this location in 1974 but his location may correspond to GE-5 since the area he indicated does not contain suitable nesting habitat.. 9.6 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Kosina Creek and 7 m up a 12-m cliff on a south-facing hillside above the south bank of the river (Kessel,et al,1982). 4.0 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Watana Creek and 13 m up a 23-m cl iff,40-m bank from and 34 m above the north bank of the river.This nest was inactive in 1981 although it did have a fresh spruce lining (Kessel,et al, 1982,unpubl.data). ~, GE-9 5.4 km up the SusitnaRiver from the mouth of Deadman Creek on a c1 iff on the north bank of the ri ver (Kessel,et a1, unpub 1.data). r- i .... ,.... GE-10 GE-ll GE-12 GE-13 GE-14 GE-15 GE-16 GE-17 GE-18 BE-1 BE-2 11.2 km north of the proposed Watana damsite~high on the southeast side of Tsusena Butte (Kessel~et al ~unpubl. data). 1.0 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Tsusena Creek and 0.8 km up and on the east bank of a small unnamed drain- age (Kessel ~et al ~unpubl.data). 10.0 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Fog Creek on the north bank of the river.White (1979)reported a Golden Eagle nest at this location in 1974~but his location prob- ably corresponds to GE-13~since the area he indicated does not appear to contain suitable nesting habitant. 9.4 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Devil Creek on a cliff on the north bank of the river (Kessel~et al~ unpublished ~ata). 5.6 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Devil Creek.A Golden Eagle nest was reported at this location on the west side of the river in 1974 (White 1974);but the nearest suit- able habitat appears to be 1.4 km and 2.0 km further down- stream (B.Cooper pers.comm.1982)and one of these locations may represent the actual 1974 location • 2.8km up Devil Creek from its confl uence with the Susitna River.Two nests (alternates)are present;one on the c1 iffs on the west side of Devil Creek and one on the cl iffs on the north side of a small ~unnamed tributary that empties into Devil Creek (Kessel ~et al ~unpubl.data). 0.6 km up Devil Creek from its confl uence with the Sus itna River and 30 m up 45 m vegetated clilff~100 m back from and 120 m above Devil Creek on the west bank (Kessel ~et a1 ~ 1982). 6.8 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Devil Creek and 3.5 km up and on the east side of a sma 11 dra i nage that joins the river from the south (Kessel ~et a1 ~unpub1. data)• 3.4 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Portage Creek on a moderate sized cliff on the north bank (Kessel~et al~ 1982). 4.2 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Tyone River. White (1974)reported two closely associated nests on the east si de of the Susitna Ri ver in 1974 but they appeared to be gone by 1980-81. 3.4 km up the Oshetna River from its confl uence with Susitna River and 4 m from edge of the west bank in a 22-rn white spruce (Kessel,et al ~1982). BE-3 4.0 km down the Susitna River from the midpoint of Vee Canyon on the south bank of the Susitna River,just west of the mouth of a small unnamed tri butary (White 1974,Kessel,et al,unpubl.data). 8E-4 1.8 km up the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of Kosi na Creek and 25 m up a 33-m cl iff on the north bank of the ri ver (White 1974,Kessel,et al,1982). B£-5 8.8 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Watana Creek on a wooded island in a live white spruce (White 1979,Kessel, et a 1,1982). .- B£-6 9.2 km up Deadman Creek from its confluence with the Susitna River on top of a 15~m,broken-topped cotton wood,25 m from the north bank of Deadman Creek (Kessel,et al,1982). '8 B£-7 On the south shore of a small pond (W8105),1.2 km east of the northeast end of Stephan lake and on top of a 13-m,' broken-topped poplar (Kessel,et al,1982). BE-8 GYR-1 ,GYR-2 GYR-3 GOS-1 GOS-2 GOS-3 R-1 1.0 km up the Susitna River from its confl uence with Indian River and on top of a 23-m,broken-topped poplar,4 m from the north riverbank (White 1974,Kessel,et al,1982). At mi dpoi nt of Vee Canyon and 100 m up a 113-m cl iff on the south bank of the Susitna River (White 1974,Kessel,et al, 1982)• 6.8 km down the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of Devi 1 Creek and 2.6 km up a gorge on the south side of the river.Nest is 100 m up 105-m cl iff in the creek canyon (White 1974, Kessel,et al,1982). 1.8 km due south of the proposed Devil1s Canyon damsite.An active nest was reported in 1974 and White (1974)commented that it was "••••back from high water 1 imits about 1/2' mi 1e •••II • 0.3 km west of the mouth of Kosina Creek on the south bank of the Susitna River (B.Cooper pers.co~n.1982). 1.6 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Fog Creek and on the southeast side of the river.Goshawk nests reported at this location in 1974 (White 1974). 2.0 km southeast of the Devil's Canyon damsite and on the west shore of a small lake (B.Cooper pers.co~.1982). 2.4 km upriver from Vee Canyon and 0.6 km up a narrow canyon on the north side of the Susitna River.A nest was reported on the east side Of the narrow canyon about 0.2 km from a sma 11 stream in 1974 (White,1974). ,- R-2 0.6 km up the Susitna River from the midpoint of Vee Canyon. An active nest was reported on the north side of the Susitna River on a south-facing cliff in 1974 (White 1974). R-3 At mi dpoi nt of Vee Canyon an acti ve rest was reported on the south-facing slope of the north bank of the Susitna River in 1974 (White 1974). R-4 5.6 to 6.6 kmdown the Susitna River from the midpoint of Vee Canyon on the north bank.An active nest was reported at this general location in 1974 (White 1974).It was probably located on one of the two small existing south-facing cliff areas. R-5 1.6 km up Jay Creek from its confl uence wi th the Sus itna River.An active nest was reported about 0.1 km east of Jay Creek up a small unnamed tributary that joins Jay Creek (White 1974). R-6 1.4 km up Kosina Creek from its confluence with the Susitna River.An active nest was reported about 0.2 km east of Kosina Creek on a northwest-facing hill (White 1974). R-7 4.6 km down the SusitnaRiver from the mouth of Kosina Creek. An active nest was reported on the north bank of the Susitna River in 197~(White 1974). R-8 5.0 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Watana Creek. An active nest was reported on the north bank of the Susitna River in 1974 (White 1974). R-9 1.0 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Watana Creek. An active nest was reported on the north bank of the Susitna River in 1974 (White 1974). R-12.... R-10 4.6 km down the Susitna River from the mouth of Watana Creek. An act i ve nest was reported on the north bank of the Sus itna River in 1974 (White 1974).The nest was inactive in 1980 (Kessel,et al,1982). R-ll 0.2 km down theSusitna River Jrom the mouth of Deadman Creek.A nest was reported on the south bank of the Susitna almost opposite the mouth of Deadman Creek (Whit~1974). 1.4 km up Deadman Creek from its confl uence with the Susitna River and 13 m up a 32-m cliff on the east bank of the creek (Kessel,et al,1982). R-13 4.2 km up Tsusena Creek from its confluence with the Susitna River.Two nests (alterates)were reported to be on a cl iff on the east bank of the creek.(Kessel,et al,1982). R-14 3.8 km up Fog Creek from its confl uence with the Susitna River.Two nests (alternates)were located on the north side of the creek and another alternate nest was located on the south side.(Kessel,et al,1982). - - R-15 2.4 km River. of the of the up Fog Creek from its confl uence with the Susitna Two nests (alternates)were located on the north side creek and an active nest was located on the south side creek (Kessel,et al,1982). R-16 7.4 km up the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of Devi 1 Creek. Nests were reported on the north bank of the Sus i tna Ri ver in 1974 (White 1974). R-17 7.4 km 0.5 km River. (White up the Susitna River from the mouth of Devil Creek and up a small drainage.that flows south into the Susitna A nest was rePQrted at this location in 1974 1974). R-19 R-18 2.4 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Devil Creek.A nest was reported on the north shore of the Susitna River in 1974 (White 197~). 1.0 km up Devil Creek from its confluence with the Susitna Ri ver and near the top of a cl iff on the west bank of the creek.An active nest was reported here in 1974 (White 1974) and it was acti ve in 1980 (Kessel,et al,1982). R-20 1.9 km down the Susitna Ri ver from the mouth of Devil Creek on cliffs on the northwest side of the river (Kessel,et al, unpub 1.data). R-21 3.6 km up the Susitna River from the mouth of Portage Creek and 0.6 km downstream from the proposed Devil Canyon damsite on the north bank of the river.A nest was reported at this location in 1974 (White 1974).